The Misogyny of Sex and the City – Why do so many women find that show/movie appealing? Marge Simpson said it best:
That’s the show about four women acting like gay guys.
—
Read Brooks’ review of Bart Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus. Ehrman used to claim to be Christian and now is a favorite of the theologically liberal Christian / atheist / Muslim sets. He does sound scholarship . . . to a point. Then he makes some missteps when playing out his agenda.
—
Evangelism is a hate crime in the UK? – Coming soon to a country near you?
Religous pluralism doesn’t promote tolerance, but criticizes those who believe – and act on the belief – that religions have objective truth value. Not only are those believers wrong, they are guilty of hate crimes.
That’s not only truly oppressive, but self-refuting.
—
The daughter of the radical feminist author of the Color Purple speaks out and highlights the awful consequences of that worldview.
—
The Bible vs. the Book of Mormon – archeology supports the Bible and embarrasses the Book of Mormon over and over.
Filed under: Weekly roundup | Tagged: Bible, feminism, God, Mormon, religion, Weekly roundup
Hi Neil,
I got the YouTube video to play, but when I click on it, it opens up the Sex and the City post.
Very interesting video so far.
I could never get into Sex in the City and have no plans to see the movie. On the other hand, I do like all of the clothes and shoes they wore. That’s about it.
As for Rebecca Walker, I’m glad that she is telling her story. I have always been skeptical of Alice Walker and feel no shock over the claims made by her daughter. In other words, I’m not surprised.
Chance – thanks, I fixed it. Not sure how that happened!
I’ve never seen an episode of Sex and the City, so I’m basing my entire opinion on two things: 1) The Title and 2) the referenced write-up.
Seems (part of) the real danger here is were telling out girls “this is what life ought to be like” and we’re telling our boys “this is the way girls think”.
What I can’t figure out (and don’t really care) is why is this attractive to mostly single girls? At least from what I’m haring guys don’t watch it and married women don’t. Is it the desire to be “naughty”? Sigmund Freud where are you when we need you?
I honestly believe that the attraction here is that single girls (in general) are, to borrow a title, “Looking for love in all the wrong places.” The bad thing is, sometimes they find it there and they end up worse off.
(Note that I used several generalities above and this doesn’t reflect my opinion of all women. Just an observation on some of them).
Well put, Marge Simpson!
I am hoping they do a sequal in 30 years and show how glamorous these gals have become.
That would be telling.
Neil,
I just spent the last one hour 6 minuts and 33 seconds watching the video. (It’s my day off)
Wow! So well done. No “in your face accusations”. Obviously, a labor of love!
Lots of good information to consider. I’ve anyone else has an hour to spare, I’d sure recommend this video. I’m gonna snag it for my website, too!
No, not really.
I’ve watched the show. I don’t identify with the characters, really – Charlotte is the “chaste” one, who will wait at least a week before bedding a guy; yet, she’s all about marriage and babies and Upper East Side snobbery.
I read somewhere that the SATC characters were pretty average for New Yorkers in terms of the amount of partners they had, but far, far above average for the rest of the nation.
Anyway… appealing (sort of) things about the show:
*The characters don’t have sweet, perfect relationships. It’s tough for men and women married young to understand, but the dating world makes full-scale invasions look tame. It’s annoying to see movies or shows with perfect, happy couples that simply don’t reflect the reality of being single.
*The friendships. As you get older when single, your friends become more important to you. I see many women who marry young or have always had a serious boyfriend (some, not all!) who have their girlfriends around as bridesmaids-in-training and nothing else.
*At least they took on the abortion issue, with one character being pro-life.
As for Alice Walker… she fails to realise that the problem with the “old ways” wasn’t that women were married and mothers (which modern women still want, very much); it was that they had no other choice. It wasn’t that they were stay at home moms that was the problem; it was that even women who wanted to work had a tough time at it. Indentured servitude, regardless of the task, is still horrible.
Instead of marching forth and declaring that women ought to be career women if they chose, SAHMs if they desire, or all of the above, she denigrated motherhood, the traditional values that were warped to make way for 19th century (and onwards) values, and home life. No wonder her daughter suffered.
Theobromophile – thanks for the perspectives!
That’s the show about four women acting like gay guys.
I once saw a video of Ann Coulter talking about how she had heard that the show was actually written for gay men.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go vomit.
“Why do so many women find that show/movie appealing?”
I have no clue. Sara Jessica Parker’s face looks like a foot!
Good post, I liked the links, but did not watch the video. I have a dial-up connection on a bad phone line.
Now, to head off topic. RE: “The wisdom of Marge Simpson”. My Sunday School Students has asked me to look at “The Gospel According to the Simpsons” by Mark Pinsky. I enjoyed the book but I thought it was beyond the scope of High School Sunday School.
But I did find a companion book, “The Gospel according to the Simpsons Leader’s Guide for Group Study” by Samuel Parvin (a United Methodist Pastor).
You should check it out if you get the chance. Marge is much wiser that I would have expected, although I think Neil already knew that.
[What Passes For] Chritianity Today has reviewed the Sex and the City movie. They give it 3 out of 4 stars.
You can read the review here.
Neil,
Loved the video and stupidly stayed up way too late watching it. I always felt that using archeology is a good strategy in Evangelism. It would be great to see the same done vs. Islam. The parallel between Islam and Mormonism is striking. That is, one guy has a vision to which no one else is witness, and he convinces others it is factual. The Bible, both Testaments, are loaded with examples of God, either the Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost, act in a manner that is witnessed by many. The stories are told, in fact, by witnesses. So everything has corroboration, and what has been left behind, as indicated by the video, adds further corroboration.
Hi SST – I read that and thought the guy did a good job with it. He is a Jewish guy who writes a religion column for the Miami Herald (I think).
Marshall – great point about the one guy in a cave getting the revelation. I like my holy book to have a little more teamwork and corroboration, I suppose.
4 Pointer – Ha! That would make a good magazine (or blog?) title.
“Marshall – great point about the one guy in a cave getting the revelation. I like my holy book to have a little more teamwork and corroboration, I suppose.”
Apparently 2 witnesses are needed to convict someone of murder or confront someone of immorality in the church, but only 1 is needed to totally revamp our understanding of God and religion.
Neil, Marge Simpson isn’t the only one who said that. So did Ann Coulter, and she drew a lot of fire from the Libs over her astute observation.
Hi Neil,
We just finished watching the hour long video. It was so inspiring to see the truth of the Bible standing against the falsehood of Mormonism. I think I will have to put that one up as well. But I want copies of the DVD for my church as well. It was really well done. Elisa said it gave her goosebumps… That would be the truth of Scripture, not the lie of Mormonism.
Blessings
Constantine invented christianity at the Council of Nicea in 325.
At that council, he forced the removal of many gospel truths and sound doctrines pertaining to the life of Jesus Christ.
Neil said: Please don’t post silly, off topic comments.