Complementarian Christians Do Not Think Women are of Equal Worth to Men – Case 2 – Christian Men Mocking the “Me Too” Sexual Assault and Harassment Twitter Tag and Bob Who Detracts (Part 1.3)
Regarding the Tweets by a person named Bob (Twitter handle: @JustBobThx) to Dee.
You can view several Tweets that Bob sent to Dee under Dee’s first Tweet (Link): here. I will be referring to those tweets through the remainder of the post.
In the midst of conservative, complementarian Christian men, such as (Link): Tim the Bible Thumping Wing Nut (his screen name) and Fred Butler mocking women sexual harassment and sexual abuse victims by way of the Twitter hash tag “Me Too,” and and (Link): Ricky Masuer defending said aforementioned mockers, Bob jumped in to dress down Dee, who was responding to the sexist tweets.
Here is a text copy of one of his tweets:
Is that so. Here’s [he includes screen captures of other people’s tweets] 1 of ur many pro- LGBT buddies in ur “we stand against abuse” club. Waiting 4 ur outrage. Better get writing a blog 2 warn ppl. This is degrading, disgusting, & vile. Ur CONSTANTLY telling GOBC 2 call out their own-so go ahead & do it urself.
Bob is quite simply trying to change the subject.
(Bob later gripes and complains about gender egalitarian Jory Michah and rants about abortion).
The issue that initiated all this dialog was (Link): Tim (aka “Bible Thumping Wing Nut”) ridiculing the sexual harassment or sexual assault of women via the “Me Too” twitter tag.
The subject was not about LGBT topics or Christian gender egalitarian Jory Michah.
Bob, because he is sexist but probably thinks he’s NOT sexist, needs to read my (Link): Post 2 about Rick Mauser, as well, at least the portions of that post under the headings of
- BIBLICAL PATRIARCHY
- CHRISTIANS SEXUALIZE GIRLS AND WOMEN, NOT JUST SECULAR CULTURE
- SEXISM EXAMPLES
- SEXISM IN THE FORM OF UNCONSCIOUS BIAS
I have been a conservative over the duration of my life.
I have been pro-life on abortion, and I always voted Republican (though I am no longer Republican. In the last few years, I have come to realize that the Republican Party is either similar to the Democratic Party in some ways, or it has its own set of flaws).
As far as LGBT issues are concerned: I believe the Bible says that homosexual behavior is sinful, but, I’m rather “libertarian” on the topic – if two adults of the same gender want to get it on, it’s not hurting me, so I do not care what they do.
However, I do not generally support liberal, social justice warriors who want to do things such as sue Christian bakers out of business for refusing to bake wedding cakes for homosexual weddings. (I am open to being persuaded otherwise on this topic.)
I do not support things such as LGBT people bullying porn actress women (Link): who refuse to have sex with homosexual men. Liberals definitely get some things wrong.
I am definitely not a liberal.
BOB’S SEXISM AND “PASTRIX”
Bob is sexist.
Bob uses the sexist derogatory term “Pastrix” (which I believe was coined by sexist radio Christian host Chris Rosebrough) to refer to women pastors, or to women who write blog posts about theology.
(I refer you again to (Link): Bob’s posts in this Twitter thread to see for yourself).
If you want to have a respectful dialog with someone on the subject of whether women should be allowed to be preachers in churches or not, that’s all fine and good, but there is no reason to use sexist, disrespectful terms such as “Pastrix” in the process.
It would be a little like a racist Christian who is opposed to black people being pastors referring to them in the midst of the debate of the issue as “Porch Monkey Pastors.”
(The phrase “porch monkey” was sometimes used by white people in one city I grew up in as a kid. It was primarily used to refer to black people. The phrase had slightly racist connotations to it where I lived.)
Maybe Bob is racist. If Bob is not racist, if he would be opposed to a racist Christian saying “I don’t think Porch Monkies should be preachers,” why is Bob not opposed to referring to women preachers using the disrespectful word “Pastrix.”
(The “Pastrix” term is sexist. It’s not cute, clever, or funny. Christians who feel that women should not be preachers should do away with that term.)
COMPLEMENTARIAN INTERPRETATION OF BIBLE IS INCORRECT
It is not a given that the Bible “clearly” teaches that women are forbidden from being preachers in churches. However, complementarians decide to interpret the Bible in that manner.
There are equally conservative Christians who dispute that complementarian interpretation.
See these resources for more on that subject:
(Link): CBE International
(Link): Junia Project
JORY MICAH, COMMUNION, AND ABORTION
In a tweet or two, Bob was asking Dee if she knows if Jory Micah believes that doctors who perform abortions should receive communion or not.
Well, Bob, and no offense to Jory Micah should she read this, I did put Jory on mute many months ago on Twitter. I was following Jory on Twitter for a couple of years, and I enjoyed most of her Tweets.
I think Jory does a fine job critiquing Christian gender complementarianism, but ever since Trump took office, she does a lot of negative Tweeting about Trump (or she was last I saw, months ago).
I didn’t vote for Trump (or for Hillary, for that matter), but if someone in my Twitter feed posts anti-Trump material quite often, it drives me bananas, so I have to put them on mute.
It’s not personal against them, it’s just a pet peeve of many to see anyone of any political stripe posting anti- Trump (or anti- Hillary or anti- Obama) stuff all live long day.
So, Bob, I’m not totally sold on everything Jory says and does.
But. You are in the wrong here.
If memory serves me, I think Jory Micah said in a tweet or two I saw over a year ago that she is PRO-LIFE. She does not agree with abortion.
I happen to be pro-life myself, but guess what, Bob?
I don’t think your question has a clear, clean cut response.
Even though I find abortion morally wrong (for cases where the mother’s life is not threatened by carrying the baby to term), the fact remains, abortion is legal in many of our states.
I know that legal does not necessarily equate to “biblically moral,” but it is legal.
It’s not illegal. If abortion is legal in someone’s state, a doctor who performs an abortion (provided they follow the laws in place) they are not engaging in illegal acts. They have not committed a crime.
I’m not sure one can or should necessarily punish someone spiritually for something they are doing in a legal, secular job, depending on what it is.
But Bob must think he is Jesus Himself or has the wisdom of Solomon from the Bible and can firmly decide either way – which is pretty arrogant.
So, Bob, I ask you:
Bob, do you think if a woman has ever received an abortion in her life, regardless the reason of the abortion, should she not receive communion?
What if the woman in question asked God to forgive her of her previous abortion, should she still not be allowed to receive communion?
Bob, do you think that alcoholics, drug addicts, prostitutes, mafia members, liars, adulterers, or people who administer death cocktails to men on death row should receive communion? Why or why not?
Should men who habitually use pornography (which would be many, (Link): many church- going Christian men) be allowed to have communion?
What about Christian men who commit adultery in their hearts, should they be permitted? Why or why not?
Homosexual marriage is legal in our nation. Would you then say that someone in a homosexual marriage should not be permitted to have communion?
What about any preacher who resides over a same-sex wedding, should they be denied communion?
How about a Christian baker who makes a homosexual couple a wedding cake, should they receive communion? Why or why not?
And maybe, Bob, you can explain why I should take YOUR OPINIONS (which is what your interpretation of the Bible comes down to) as final word for any of your responses to those questions?
By the way, Bob, what is your hang up with communion?
I was raised Baptist – the communion is 100% symbolic; it’s not the actual body and blood of Christ to me, not even a little bit… not even partially, not even in ‘reality but not in appearance’.
I stopped going to church years ago, for a whole bunch of reasons, and I don’t miss communion. My life is going along just fine without sipping the grape juice or eating the cracker.
Hey Bob, most importantly: being willing to serve communion to a doctor who performs abortion is not the same thing as supporting abortion itself.
Church abuse “expert” Dee Parsons to “pastrix” who says she’ll serve communion 2 abortion doctors who rip the arms & legs off babies “Thank you for supporting abuse issues.”
Dee primarily posts and Tweets about topics such as churches covering up child sex abuse or domestic violence, or spiritual abuse.
In all the times I’ve visited her blog, I do not recall her tackling abortion. What she chooses to Tweet or blog about is her business. If she doesn’t want to blog about abortion, that’s her prerogative.
If you feel this strongly about abortion, or about serving communion to abortion providers, start your own blog and discuss it.
Bob, you don’t support women who are being abused.
No, you don’t. Bob, I take it based on your preoccupation with bashing Jory Michah and your other behavior, that you don’t care about women being sexually abused and harassed.
You enjoy harassing Dee and Jory, it looks like.
Rather than support abused women, you choose to derail this entire conversation, which started because your acquaintance, Tim (“Bible Thumper Wing Nut”), who (Link): mocked and made fun of female sexual abuse survivors who were using Twitter’s “Me Too” hash tag.
BOB REVISITS JORY MICAH
Bob said to Dee (Tweet link):
I said zero about your church. I challenge you to answer the question I’ve repeatedly asked you. Is
@jorymicah a false teacher and an enemy of the gospel? Yes or no. //
No, Bob, Jory Micah is not a false teacher nor is she an “enemy of the gospel.
My guess is that Bob believes, due to his OPINIONS and flawed interpretation of the Bible, that anyone who would find it acceptable to give communion to an abortion provider, or who does not support gender complementarianism, is a “false teacher” and “enemy of the gospel.”
Bob, based on my understanding of the Bible, you are a false teacher and an enemy of the Gospel, not only because you are opposed to abortion providers receiving communion, and not only because you are opposed to women being preachers, but because you are sexist, and you support other sexist men (such as Tim and Fred Butler) in their mocking female sexual abuse survivors on Twitter.
PRO – LGBT FRIENDS
As per some of Dee’s so-called “pro LGBT” friends.
Hey, Bob, I put one of Dee’s “pro LGBT” friends on mute sometime last year (or early this year). But before I get to that.
I don’t see why who Dee talks with online is of concern to this Bob guy.
It has nothing to do with Bob’s friend, Tim, mocking women sexual assault victims, as he did.
Jesus of Nazareth used to associate with and befriend the people of day and time who were considered sinners by his culture, such as prostitutes and tax collectors.
Regardless, I ended up blocking one of Dee’s pro-LGBT friends, Nate.
My Nate Story
I initially began following Nate for his wonderful content exposing the errors of complementarianism, but eventually, his twitter account turned into a constant day and night defense of LGBT related subjects.
I can handle one or two pro- LGBT tweets per day, but with this guy, it was non-stop, around the clock, pro LGBT stuff all the time, and it got old.
It was too much for me personally, so I put him on mute at that point.
The reason I finally put Nate on block (not just mute) is that he was man-splaining (which is rather sexist) intersectional feminism to other women on Twitter.
The guy who is against sexism was being sexist to a woman and dictating to her how he thinks she “ought” to blog about feminism on her own blog. That did not go over well with me.
Nate was actually arguing with, or pressuring, a white feminist lady on Twitter, who was not interested in writing posts about sexism that black women endure.
She explained that was not her area of interest, nor did she feel qualified to discuss it, since she herself is not black and therefore may not do a good job of writing about sexism from a person of color’s view (which is totally understandable, Nate).
Nate, though, was basically accusing that woman of not being supportive of feminism or of all women, merely because she chose to blog mainly about sexist issues from a white woman’s view (which makes sense, as she was white herself.)
I had it with Nate’s man-splaining to that lady, which I told him about on Twitter, he remained argumentative about it, so I said “adios” to Nate at that point.
You see, Bob, I’m not totally sold out to all of Dee’s “pro LGBT” friends, either. But you’re wrong here.
DEE and LGBT
As to Dee’s views on LGBT – a lot of her blog’s readership (though not all) tilt to the left side.
You’re going to find a lot of liberal people who read or participate on her blog – which is fine.
But what that means is that Dee probably feels she has to dance around topics that are near and dear to the heart of liberals, such as LGBT topics.
(If she reads any of this, she may correct anything I say here. I am attempting to describe her views as honestly and accurately as I understand them.)
From what I’ve been able to gather from reading Dee’s blog posts on LGBT subjects, she thinks that the Bible does not sanction LGBT sexual behavior (homosexuals should remain celibate over lives).
I think Dee’s blog’s readership is such (many, but not all, are liberals) that some of them may be upset if she were to be quite so up-front on her LGBT views, so she probably tries to be indirect about the subject (I am guessing).
However, at the same time, I take it that Dee believes that churches and Christians should stop being so mean-spirited, condemning, and nasty to homosexuals, as they often are.
(Let’s face it, a lot of Christians behave as though homosexual sex is the number one worst sin ever, and they treat homosexuals accordingly.)
My own position on that subject is quite similar.
I am a celibate hetero woman, and let me tell you, I’ve been blogging here for years about how most Christian churches not only do not support hetero celibate adults, but, they no longer speak out against HETERO sexual sins, including fornication.
Forget about LGBT issuees, Bob, and look at how churches no longer support the concept of virginity until marriage and adult celibacy for hetero-sexuals, but rather, they (even conservatives) jumped on the liberal bandwagon of mocking or criticizing sexual purity (I have examples on my blog of this very thing).
Until I see the Christian church of America support celibacy again (for hetero and homosexual adults), and start speaking out as fervently against HETERO sexual sin as they do on LGBT, Christians can kindly shut up about HOMO-sexual sexual sin.
GUYS LIKE BOB, TIM, AND FRED ARE WHAT IS CREATING THE “DONES AND NONES” – NOT THE JORYS AND DEES
Bob said to Dee (Tweet Link):
When will you and your other heroes of the marginalized and abused be writing your multiple blog posts of condemnation and tweeting your immense outrage to warn others about this wolf in the church?!!! ///
I already mentioned above that Jory Micah is not a “wolf in the church.”
Jory is certainly not a “wolf” because, as Bob would likely argue, she disagrees with Bob’s interpretations of the Bible and has her own understanding of certain biblical passages.
Wolves in the church hurt people and deliberately try to harm and mislead. I’ve never been hurt by Jory Micah.
I’ve never seen any indication in Jory’s Tweets or blog posts that she is intentionally trying to mislead, deceive, or harm anyone.
Jory is not the reason I am thinking about leaving the Christian faith, Bob.
It’s YOUR behavior, Bob, and guys like you, such as Tim and Fred, who inch me closer out the door of leaving the faith – not the Dees or Jorys, and not even the Nates out there.
Bob, don’t be so quick to sarcastically write off Dee’s blog as you did there.
If it weren’t for supportive blogs such as Dee’s, those of us who are thinking about walking away from the Christian faith (such as myself) would have dumped it a long while ago.
It means something to me to see a Christian (such as Dee) who stands up for the people who have been wounded or exploited by dishonest or seedy pastors, churches, or damaging theology.
Dee and those like her who you condemn make me think, “maybe there are some Christians who actually believe in the faith and DO what Christ taught.”
I cannot say the same of you, or you friends Tim or Fred. Not with the behaviors I’ve seen from you or them (like again, put on display here by Tim and Fred).
Look at how you, Bob, so blithely write off those who have been hurt by churches, certain Christian teachings, or by other Christians – guys like you just don’t get it.
The Bible says you are to police your own (1 Cor 5), not run around calling out the sins of the Non-Christians in culture.
You, Bob, are not being biblical. You don’t believe that Christians should call out the wrong-doers among them, the ones who are actual wrong-doers, not women who merely hold a different understanding of biblical passages from you.
What makes Christianity look bogus to those outside the faith are not that Christians sin or make mistakes, but that when mistakes or sin are created, Christians rush to cover up the sin, rather than expose it and try to correct it.
Guys like you hate and despise that bloggers such as Dee expose wrong doing by churches or by specific pastors.
You resent the hell out of it. You would rather protect the abusive status quo, Bob.
BOB DOES NOT THINK WOMEN ARE EQUAL IN VALUE TO MEN
I would assume Bob is a gender complementarian Christian.
I (Link): used to be a complementarian myself (I was unfortunately raised in it), so I am very familiar with what complementarians think and why they think it.
I’m also more than familiar with the complementarian obnoxiously arrogant attitude that only THEIR way of reading the Bible concerning women is the “right” or “godly” way.
Complementarians tell Christians that they believe that “women are equal in worth to men, just not in role.”
The fact that Bob is choosing to defend Tim and Fred’s sexism by detouring from the (Link): sexist tweets that started it all speaks volumes.
Bob definitely demonstrates that he’s opposed to women being teachers or preachers, and so he nails down the “not equal in role” part of the complementarian equation.
Good lord almighty, do complementarians EXCEL at expressing their sexist beliefs where they endlessly pound a table and scream that they forbid a woman to teach!, woman submit to yer man!, etc, ad naseum.
Where complementarians such as Bob fail is that they are incapable of showing that they actually and truly do consider women to be of equal worth to men. That is the part complementarians don’t care about, it’s not as exciting at yelling at women, dictating to women what they may and may not do, and bossing women around.
Bob also demonstrates, that contrary to complementarian talking points, he does not consider women equal in value to men.
Oh yes, yes, I’m sure Bob would tweet me to say he does value women equally to men, but actions speak louder than words, Bob.
It’s too late – your sexist attitude is dripping all over those Tweets to Dee. Your hand Tweets what your heart is full of.
Bob’s disdain and dislike of women drips in his attitude all through his Tweets to Dee, about Dee, and about Jory.
Bob’s habit of referring to egalitarian Christian women with derogatory terms referencing their gender, such as “pastrix” is one indication.
Bob probably only thinks women are equal in value to him and to men in general if, and only if, they totally agree with things such as… his opinions, his theological views, his interpretation of the Bible.
Does Bob hold Tim and other men up to those same standards?
Do Tim and Bob agree with each other constantly on ever single issue?
Does Bob ever find himself disagreeing with other men online when discussing theological topics?
When Bob does find himself disagreeing with other men on theology, does he automatically assume that each and all of his male opponents are “wolves” and should be denied communion?
Does Bob insult those men using gender-specific terms to take a dig at their biological sex in the process (whatever the equivalent to “Pastrix” would be for a man?) and so on? (Probably not.)
Bob’s intentional detraction from (Link): Tim and Fred’s sexism, (their sexism consisting of ridiculing women sexual assault and sexual harassment), by ranting to Dee about abortion, LGBT, and Jory Micah, shows he does not care about women victims, nor does he consider women to be equal in worth to men. Complementarianism is once more shown to be a hoax.
Bob needs to repent of his sexism and learn to stick to the topic at hand.
Dec 12, 2017, edit:
Bob replied to one of my tweets by saying (that Tweet is located somewhere in (Link): this thread):
Oh look…another one of Dee’s longtime buddies in her war against abuse! Thanks for the kind words
@sololoner2 – that’s a compliment coming from you 🙂 Nice crowd you’re running with these days. Jeff.
— end —
I replied to Bob:
Bob, it’s that very type of rude, condescending attitude you’ve shown in that tweet – as well as your friend’s initial, sexist mocking of the MeToo hash that has been driving me away from Christianity. I’m sure you’re making Jesus proud, Bob. For you, Bob: (cite link to this very post)
By the way, Bob. The Bible says the Religious Muckity Mucks, the Pharisees, used to slam Jesus for the “crowd he ran with,” because they thought of themselves as sinless perfection who would never consort w/ sinners. Jesus had to correct them on that thinking several times over.
— end —
Bob seems to be under the mistaken notion that every one disagreeing with him supports all LGBT causes or abortion, which is not the case. I sent him this other Tweet-
Parts 1, 2 of this series: