Is religion unfair towards women ?

Originally Posted by Animus27

Not precisely - while Mary Magdalene is given a special position in the GoM, it reflects a later tradition of gnosticizing (is that a word? well now it is ) that was popular in the second century, that's not necessarily an anathema to more orthodox Christian teachings. In the early church, women had a major role, performing as deaconesses and helping administer their churches, St. Paul mentions highly respected Christian women in some of his letters; in fact one of the critiques that was leveled at Christianity by it's pagan detractors was that a large percentage of Christians were women and slaves, which meant it was a hysterical superstition (from their point of view). Even so, Christianity is a egalitarian religion, but since it is a continuation of a patriarchal religion, Judaism, and defined itself in an even more patriarchal and male-centered society - the Roman Empire of the Mediterranean, it's naturally inherited a few androcentric tendencies, especially in it's manifestation as a state religion.

O.K but Mary Magdalene was later denigrated in status to being a penitent prostitute. That is disgraceful (literally), underhanded, revealing and most certainly sexist.

Originally Posted by amy green

O.K but Mary Magdalene was later denigrated in status to being a penitent prostitute. That is disgraceful (literally), underhanded, revealing and most certainly sexist.

But the kicker is... Mary Magdalene wasn't a prostitute! The story of her formerly working the oldest trade in the world is a more recent (think middle ages) identification of her with the "sinful woman" who anoints Jesus' feet, also named Mary. The Church has almost always made a distinction between them, the sinful woman being called Mary of Bethany. It is true that Mary Magdalene had seven demons cast out of her by Jesus, but there's no mention of her being a prostitute. Oddly enough, Church Tradition holds that Mary Magdalene led such a chaste and pure life that it was possible she would've bore Christ as her child, so the Devil sent demons to torment her. There's also her being the first to see the Risen Christ, earning her the title "Apostle to the Apostles".

And, even if she was a prostitute, it's not a big deal, since one of Jesus' ancestors was Rahab, a Canaanite woman of the evening who helped Joshua's spies in Jericho, who turned from her ways and became an Israelite.

Originally Posted by Animus27

But the kicker is... Mary Magdalene wasn't a prostitute! The story of her formerly working the oldest trade in the world is a more recent (think middle ages) identification of her with the "sinful woman" who anoints Jesus' feet, also named Mary. The Church has almost always made a distinction between them, the sinful woman being called Mary of Bethany. It is true that Mary Magdalene had seven demons cast out of her by Jesus, but there's no mention of her being a prostitute. Oddly enough, Church Tradition holds that Mary Magdalene led such a chaste and pure life that it was possible she would've bore Christ as her child, so the Devil sent demons to torment her. There's also her being the first to see the Risen Christ, earning her the title "Apostle to the Apostles".

And, even if she was a prostitute, it's not a big deal, since one of Jesus' ancestors was Rahab, a Canaanite woman of the evening who helped Joshua's spies in Jericho, who turned from her ways and became an Israelite.

Yes I know she wasn't a prostitute - that's my point, i.e. (as mentioned) she was a key disciple in her own right, one of Jesus' followers and conversed privately with Jesus. She was present at Jesus' two most important moments: the crucifixion and the resurrection. She is the only person to be listed in all 4 gospels. Jealousy and fear (of her popularity) are probably instrumental in tarnishing her image in later years.

Originally Posted by amy green

Yes I know she wasn't a prostitute - that's my point, i.e. (as mentioned) she was a key disciple in her own right, one of Jesus' followers and conversed privately with Jesus. She was present at Jesus' two most important moments: the crucifixion and the resurrection. She is the only person to be listed in all 4 gospels. Jealousy and fear (of her popularity) are probably instrumental in tarnishing her image in later years.

That's just it, though, for most of Christian history and tradition she hasn't been tarnished. If anything, it's more recent readers who link her with the sinful woman in Luke 7:36-50 - something that Church Tradition denies. Recent books about gnostics, Jesus' bloodline, and such have helped bring the image of St. Mary Magdalene as a prostitute into the foreground, and affix it to the popular consciousness. Now, there have been a few ancient figures who did link her with the supposed prostitute, but their opinions go against the bulk of saints, and the tradition the church itself holds.

A good quote from St. Jerome is relevant to how the early church regarded her, I think

The unbelieving reader may perhaps laugh at me for dwelling so long on the praises of mere women; yet if he will but remember how holy women followed our Lord and Saviour and ministered to Him of their substance, and how the three Marys stood before the cross and especially how Mary Magdalen—called the tower from the earnestness and glow of her faith—was privileged to see the rising Christ first of all before the very apostles, he will convict himself of pride sooner than me of folly. For we judge of people’s virtue not by their sex but by their character, and hold those to be worthy of the highest glory who have renounced both rank and wealth*. - Letter CXXVII. To Principia

*in tradition, Mary is held to be a woman of decent wealth who helped support Jesus and his disciples

[ElderFlame]

Religion is suppression freedom of thought. That includes religions like Buddhism I will explain why I believe this if anyone wants to know my opinion

Religion is usually referencing christianity (well, its "Supposed to"...)

The Iroquois tribes (which were half the eastern US and Canada), were run by women. They had all right to property, could be what we call "cheifs" now (ran the vilage, healing, trade etc). To make it easier, women did everything, besides war and hunting.

I dare use the Celts as examples too. Sure, the info is vague but from what we can tell, women were more on the "even" side. They would fight battles even.....

As animus has pointed out, egypt was also generally fair to women (lets ignore the hetchepsut "episode" though for simplicities sake ). Also as he mentioned in early christianity, there wasnt too much opprestion - This didnt see to start until rome got a hold of it.

Also animus - she was the first one jesus seen (with ruth?) when he resurrected, also is depicted a few times as the "right had "man"" of jesus ( probably a bit extrapolated), and was one of the few people to be there when jesus died (mother mary, magdeline and..... was it John or peter?)

Generally speaking though... women do get the bad end of the stick in much of history (at least western culture). The thing is now its the opposite. The womens right movement isnt about equality now as much as it is about WOMAN POWER, which to be fair, is exactly what women hated for a very long time.

[Belle]

If women are repressed, then an enormous pressure are put on men (by men?) to be honourable, loving, dutiful and clear leaders.

I always get a kick when I talk like this but it is an issue, which, in my mind takes two and I truly believe there has been a co-dependency of women buying into being repressed - most likely subconciously or in the higher self. There are two egos at stake - both the male ego and the female ego - allowing this situ to perpetuate (that is the situ of male ruling).

The age of Pisces was meant to be the age for the women, with women at the forefront. The age of Taurus is now for men for to come into their own right. I'm wondering if being the "surpressed gender" is the stronger role, and we will see an abundance of women rulers / leaders in this era, as men find a strong calling in being "surpressed".

Personally, the call to obedience to me is a high calling and not one that I would do easily. I often think of the word "obey" in the Christian marriage ceremony and I used - and still do - believe that I could happily agree to it if - and that's the big if - my spouse could agree to "love me as Christ loved the church".

As to Mary Mag - she rocks! Her wonder is yet to unfold.

[Baile]

Originally Posted by Belle

I always get a kick when I talk like this but it is an issue, which, in my mind takes two and I truly believe there has been a co-dependency of women buying into being repressed - most likely subconciously or in the higher self. There are two egos at stake - both the male ego and the female ego - allowing this situ to perpetuate (that is the situ of male ruling).

Women were repressed for centuries, that's indisputable. I don't believe that's the case anymore except in specific instantances -- the Catholic religion for example. I do agree with you regarding self-repression and today's society: music videos with Lady Gaga and Beyonce jumping about in their lingerie for example.

[Belle]

I'm not saying women weren't repressed, but I ponder whether women subconsciously agreed to it, whether there was a higher order at stake?

The responsibility of child-rearing is something that has been traditionally taken on by women and I would suggest is a very very high order and carries a lot of power.

Changing of the system to turn it is really tough, and small steps required and I also think the pendulum may well turn the other way so that men are repressed.

[kerrielle]

In many ancient pagan or aboriginal cultures women were much more powerful - many matriarchies existed before the era of masculine energy dominated the Earth with the primary religions dominant today. These are all patriarchal in nature where men do wield more power and in many cases use the teachings of the religion to suppress and control women's lives. There's no doubt about that. This is still a "man's world' and religions were used to make it so.

I have been told, and feel this for myself, (or perhaps it is wishful thinking) that there is a shift to a feminine energy happening as the world needs it. We are seriously out of balance. Humans are anyway. We are heading over the cliff of self extinction and no one seems able or willing to stop it. Not with the patriarchal institutions and energies in place. We MUST change.

I am a great believer and proponent of Spirituality.
I believe Religion can be used for growth and good. But I also believe that men have corrupted and used religion for so long as a tool of power and oppression that its day must end for us to evolve and survive.