Women bishops in Wales

[ahinton]

1. Jesus never ordained any women (some would argue that he never 'ordained' anyone.) We don't hear of any women disciples in the canonical gospels.

Some would indeed argue that Jesus never "ordained" anyone per se, which fact might well go some waytowards weakening some people's arguments against the ordination of women (although we are here discussing not so much the ordination of women to the presthood but to the offices of bishop and above). We do not indeed hear of any women disciples in the canonical gospels but, since there appears to be no hard and fast evidence that Jesus spoke out against women occupying such rôles, I'm not sure that this would help to support any argument against the ordination or women or the appoitment of women to higher offices within the Church.

2. They menstruate.

So what? Well, of course I do not literally mean "so what?" but what relevance would that have in this context? Even the appalling text from Leviticus that you cite here would appear only to bar women from being treated as any kind of citizens at all during the seven days immediately following the birth of their offspring (although the literal pertinence if all of that stuff in a contemporary context is surely illustrated by the reference to turtles and pigeons); no one would expect a woman who wanted to be ordained or elevated to the rôle of bishop or above would be expected to clean herself up within seven days of giving birth and take a couple of turtles and/or pigeons to the men who might or might not ordain her or elect her bishop! I describe this text as appalling in the sense that it effectively denounces women who give birth to women or men of whom the latter might be expected to occupy certain roles but the former not; why would we take this into consideration today in terms of women's reasonable expectations of entitlement to hold office in the Church?

[An_Inspector_Calls]

I would refer you (if I may) to the implications of his Msg #46 and his insulting reference to "Welsh Wimmin" [sic]. If you can discern no 'implications', perhaps we could develop the discussion further?

The use of Wimmin is offensive?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/wimmin-know-your-place-2352729.html

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/sep/05/greenham3

http://www.wildwimminfilms.com/

http://www.willinwimmin.org.au/

etc.

[amateur51]

The use of Wimmin is offensive?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/wimmin-know-your-place-2352729.html

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/sep/05/greenham3

http://www.wildwimminfilms.com/

http://www.willinwimmin.org.au/

etc.

From my experience, certainly the use of 'wimmin' in three of those examples is made by radical women who are trying to make a political point, in the same way as Black people sometimes use the 'n' word and lesbians and gay men sometimes user 'queer', and 'faggot' for men and 'dyke' for women. These meanings are usually not for general use.

[french frank]

The use of Wimmin is offensive?

Yes, when used where 'women' would be normal by someone who is generally very abusive about "feminists".

Am51 got in before me to mention the ironic use of the term.

[eighthobstruction]

YES, i know, some people ironically use the term idiot when talking about me...

[french frank]

In fact the now rather common term 'wimmin' was originally intended to be rather more 'insulting' to men it would appear ...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wimmin

Examples quoted are, on the contrary, obviously made by misogynistic men.

It is also phonetically accurate, don't you think?

Not all words are written with 'phonetic accuracy'. Perhaps you would explain why YOU used it in that post, rather than spelling it correctly? Just a joke? - at whose expense?

But my main point was the rest of your post, not that particular spelling. Your view of anyone or anything that could be termed 'feminist' is well-known, so what you write will tend to be read with that in mind.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

In other words, you're quite determined to take offense. What else was 'offensive' in #46?

Scotty: thanks for the link to the urban dictionary. While I was there I looked up another 'offensive' term (one used by none other than Simon Schama on Question Time from New York)

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=blowhard

[french frank]

In other words, you're quite determined to take offense. What else was 'offensive' in #46?

I didn't say anything else was offensive: I said, exactly: 'I would refer you (if I may) to the implications of his Msg #46 and his insulting reference to "Welsh Wimmin" [sic]. If you can discern no 'implications', perhaps we could develop the discussion further? '

I said that as you seemed to be suggesting that Jean was, without justification, putting words into Scottycelt's mouth. My feeling was that she was correct. I'm not sure whether you were querying it because you disagreed with her or whether - in the best sense of the phrase - 'for the sake of argument', argumenti causa, which is a useful method for developing a discussion.

[scottycelt]

Examples quoted are, on the contrary, obviously made by misogynistic men.

Not all words are written with 'phonetic accuracy'. Perhaps you would explain why YOU used it in that post, rather than spelling it correctly? Just a joke? - at whose expense?

But my main point was the rest of your post, not that particular spelling. Your view of anyone or anything that could be termed 'feminist' is well-known, so what you write will tend to be read with that in mind.

Aye, okay then, whatever you say ... it's your forum, so you're the boss.

However, how you can square using the term 'misogynistic men' and also in another place 'We could, of course, agree to agree that a (strong-willed) woman stands a better chance of getting at the truth than a middle-class, middle-aged-to-elderly man' only you are in very much of a position to explain.

You quite likely 'insulted' (wholly inadvertently of course) a huge chunk, if not the majority, of forum members! :winkeye:

[Mr Pee]

I don't know why people are getting so worked up about the use of the word "wimmin". It was just a bit of fun.

[french frank]

However, how you can square using the term 'misogynistic men' and also in another place 'We could, of course, agree to agree that a (strong-willed) woman stands a better chance of getting at the truth than a middle-class, middle-aged-to-elderly man' only you are in very much of a position to explain.

I thought the meaning was obvious - that since the Trust were mainly men of the type specified, inquisitors of the same stripe would tend to be better able to empathise with them. Just as if the Trust representatives had all been fashionable middle-aged women, a questioner who was also a fashionable middle-aged woman could empathise with them. IOW, it was a matter of fact that Trust members were, almost all, men, Oxbridge educated (Thompson, Agius at Cambridge, Patten, Kroll at Oxford, Lyons only was at QMUL), all in their 60s or not far off.

[jean]

From my experience, certainly the use of 'wimmin' in three of those examples is made by radical women who are trying to make a political point, in the same way as Black people sometimes use the 'n' word and lesbians and gay men sometimes user 'queer', and 'faggot' for men and 'dyke' for women. These meanings are usually not for general use.

The case of wimmin is different from those others - it really was first used in the 1970s by feminists avoiding the men in women. It wasn't so much that they wanted to insult men, as scotty thinks, so much as dissociate themselves from them.

Then it was picked up by the misogynistic men who wanted to jeer at feminists (Private Eye's 'Wimmin' column doesn't appear any more, I'm glad to say).

I had thought that the feminists invented the spelling, but the OED tells me it was used in the C18:

1710–23 M. Campbell Let. in J. Maidment Argyle Papers (1834) 204 As for the wimmin, if my coming to toun can secur tham, I'l chous to walk it.

That might have been an attempt at a dialect pronunciation, and the next two examples almost certainly were:

1792 W. Borrow in M. F. G.-B. Giner & M. Montgomery Knaresborough Workhouse Daybk. (2003) 111 All the wimmin in the house is frameing Shifts.

1836 Tait's Edinb. Mag. May 288/1 The wimmin was keepin Mester Arnold from doing ony mischief.

Which is odd, because the pronunciation indicated is exactly the same as the standard one - unless the C18 century pronunciation was different?

.

[Flosshilde]

The case of wimmin is different from those others - it really was first used in the 1970s by feminists avoiding the men in women.

I think 'Wombyn' had its moment, too, but a fairly limited one.

It wasn't so much that they wanted to [I]insult[/I men, as scotty thinks, so much as dissociate themselves from them.

Which was quite enough for the likes of Scotty to feel insulted.

[french frank]

The case of wimmin is different from those others - it really was first used in the 1970s by feminists avoiding the men in women.

There's also a kind of social etiquette in that I'm allowed to be self-deprecating - but you are distinctly unfriendly if you belittle me, for example. Just as I can criticise my children, but you're no friend of mine if you do it.

[Mr Pee]

I think 'Wombyn' had its moment, too, but a fairly limited one.

Quite right. Not nearly as funny.