<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Natural Woman: Enemy to God?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 14:44:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gospel Planet &#187; Christian Masculinity</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-14324</link>
		<dc:creator>Gospel Planet &#187; Christian Masculinity</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Feb 2007 16:42:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-14324</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] I genuinely hope this doesn&#039;t come across as sacrilegious, but if women naturally possess Christlike attributes&#8221;if, in fact, as Michael Otterson argues, &quot;Stereotypical &#039;Female&#039; Qualities Are Core of What Jesus Taught,&quot;#8220;why was Jesus a man? In a Church that seems to embrace some sort of gender essentialism, what does it mean to that concept of gender that a male Jesus exemplified core female behaviors? [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I genuinely hope this doesn&#8217;t come across as sacrilegious, but if women naturally possess Christlike attributes&#8221;if, in fact, as Michael Otterson argues, &#8220;Stereotypical &#8216;Female&#8217; Qualities Are Core of What Jesus Taught,&#8221;#8220;why was Jesus a man? In a Church that seems to embrace some sort of gender essentialism, what does it mean to that concept of gender that a male Jesus exemplified core female behaviors? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Starfoxy</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-14045</link>
		<dc:creator>Starfoxy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 04:14:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-14045</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;Scholars from Reed College and Stanford reviewed over 150 praise studies. Their meta-analysis determined that praised students become risk-averse and lack perceived autonomy. The scholars found consistent correlations between a liberal use of praise and students&#039; &quot;shorter task persistence, more eye-checking with the teacher, and inflected speech such that answers have the intonation of questions.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dweck&#039;s research on overpraised kids strongly suggests that image maintenance becomes their primary concern--they are more competitive and more interested in tearing others down. A raft of very alarming studies illustrate this.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is from the NYT &#039;The Power (and Peril) of Praising your Kids&#039; from BCC&#039;s sideblog (I&#039;d put the link in, but whenever I do that the comment gets snagged by the spam filter). The whole thing is worth reading, and has many interesting implications for what is being discussed here.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Scholars from Reed College and Stanford reviewed over 150 praise studies. Their meta-analysis determined that praised students become risk-averse and lack perceived autonomy. The scholars found consistent correlations between a liberal use of praise and students&#8217; &#8220;shorter task persistence, more eye-checking with the teacher, and inflected speech such that answers have the intonation of questions.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dweck&#8217;s research on overpraised kids strongly suggests that image maintenance becomes their primary concern&#8211;they are more competitive and more interested in tearing others down. A raft of very alarming studies illustrate this.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is from the NYT &#8216;The Power (and Peril) of Praising your Kids&#8217; from BCC&#8217;s sideblog (I&#8217;d put the link in, but whenever I do that the comment gets snagged by the spam filter). The whole thing is worth reading, and has many interesting implications for what is being discussed here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-14044</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 03:39:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-14044</guid>
		<description>Another fun quote to ponder, even if I&#039;m not exactly sure what it means or if it just sounds cool:

then i awoke and dug that if i dreamed natural dreams of being a natural woman doing what a woman does when she&#039;s natural i would have a revolution ~ Nikki Giovanni</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another fun quote to ponder, even if I&#8217;m not exactly sure what it means or if it just sounds cool:</p>
<p>then i awoke and dug that if i dreamed natural dreams of being a natural woman doing what a woman does when she&#8217;s natural i would have a revolution ~ Nikki Giovanni</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-14039</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 02:32:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-14039</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m late to the table, but I offer a hearty &quot;amen&quot; to your assessment of these discomfitting talks. They always remind me of Louisa May Alcott&#039;s quip that &quot;men put women on a pedastal and then ask them to get down on it.&quot; While I doubt GAs ever have such insidious conscious intent, those talks illicit in me the analysis Kaimi mentions: &quot;Hmm, I&#039;m being told--again--that I&#039;m essentially superior to and by some people who have been socially constructed as superior to me in almost every structural sense. I need a donut.&quot; 

I don&#039;t doubt that the speakers are sincere, or even that women generally exhibit these characteristics more frequently than do men (whether from lower testosterone or societal conditioning I can&#039;t say). And I suppose as a hyper-mama type, I should bask in the praise of my nurturance. But, see, it&#039;s my nurturing spirit that most balks at those talks, exactly because I care about so many women who find essentialist gender equations deeply *personally* hurtful and at odds with what they know about their own nature. The academic dissections? I can deal with those, even enjoy them. The friends who want to curl into fetal position or flee the church because they&#039;re certain they can&#039;t measure to the church&#039;s active requirements when their passive, inherent natures fall short of the mark? That just makes me nuts. It makes the spiritual, kind, nurturing, soft me NUTS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m late to the table, but I offer a hearty &#8220;amen&#8221; to your assessment of these discomfitting talks. They always remind me of Louisa May Alcott&#8217;s quip that &#8220;men put women on a pedastal and then ask them to get down on it.&#8221; While I doubt GAs ever have such insidious conscious intent, those talks illicit in me the analysis Kaimi mentions: &#8220;Hmm, I&#8217;m being told&#8211;again&#8211;that I&#8217;m essentially superior to and by some people who have been socially constructed as superior to me in almost every structural sense. I need a donut.&#8221; </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t doubt that the speakers are sincere, or even that women generally exhibit these characteristics more frequently than do men (whether from lower testosterone or societal conditioning I can&#8217;t say). And I suppose as a hyper-mama type, I should bask in the praise of my nurturance. But, see, it&#8217;s my nurturing spirit that most balks at those talks, exactly because I care about so many women who find essentialist gender equations deeply *personally* hurtful and at odds with what they know about their own nature. The academic dissections? I can deal with those, even enjoy them. The friends who want to curl into fetal position or flee the church because they&#8217;re certain they can&#8217;t measure to the church&#8217;s active requirements when their passive, inherent natures fall short of the mark? That just makes me nuts. It makes the spiritual, kind, nurturing, soft me NUTS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kristine</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-13682</link>
		<dc:creator>Kristine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:54:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-13682</guid>
		<description>For the record, the current women&#039;s world record in the mile is around 4:12 and falling fast.  We&#039;ll see women running under 4 minutes within the decade.  And men have lowered the record only to about 3:43 (?) since Roger Bannister--the gender gap is closing remarkably quickly in countries where women and men receive roughly equal encouragement and funding for serious athletic training.  There&#039;s likely to always be a pretty profound gap in sports where sheer muscle mass and upper body strength are important, but at least in running, untangling biological effects from cultural ones suggests a more limited role for biology than we might have suspected a few decades ago.

I&#039;m inclined to think that the organizational skills and spiritual gifts necessary for building Zion are more like running than power lifting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For the record, the current women&#8217;s world record in the mile is around 4:12 and falling fast.  We&#8217;ll see women running under 4 minutes within the decade.  And men have lowered the record only to about 3:43 (?) since Roger Bannister&#8211;the gender gap is closing remarkably quickly in countries where women and men receive roughly equal encouragement and funding for serious athletic training.  There&#8217;s likely to always be a pretty profound gap in sports where sheer muscle mass and upper body strength are important, but at least in running, untangling biological effects from cultural ones suggests a more limited role for biology than we might have suspected a few decades ago.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m inclined to think that the organizational skills and spiritual gifts necessary for building Zion are more like running than power lifting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark IV</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-13601</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark IV</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 19:26:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-13601</guid>
		<description>As always, ECS, you raise a pretty good question.

I&#039;ve always assumed you could draw a pretty straight line from the level of testosterone in the brain to the amount of agressive behavior the owner of the brain displays.  But there are plenty of people who are awash in testosterone who manage to modulate their behavior, so I guess I need to rethink my assumptions.

For some reason, &lt;em&gt;Lockdown II:  Women behind Bars &lt;/em&gt;sounds like something that would require a visit to the bishop&#039;s office after viewing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As always, ECS, you raise a pretty good question.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve always assumed you could draw a pretty straight line from the level of testosterone in the brain to the amount of agressive behavior the owner of the brain displays.  But there are plenty of people who are awash in testosterone who manage to modulate their behavior, so I guess I need to rethink my assumptions.</p>
<p>For some reason, <em>Lockdown II:  Women behind Bars </em>sounds like something that would require a visit to the bishop&#8217;s office after viewing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ECS</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-13599</link>
		<dc:creator>ECS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 18:59:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-13599</guid>
		<description>LOL, Lynnette.  I just watched a preview for National Geographic&#039;s &lt;em&gt;Lockdown II: Women Behind Bars&lt;/em&gt;.  Not many meek and submissive &quot;sweet spirits&quot; to be found there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LOL, Lynnette.  I just watched a preview for National Geographic&#8217;s <em>Lockdown II: Women Behind Bars</em>.  Not many meek and submissive &#8220;sweet spirits&#8221; to be found there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lynnette</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-13522</link>
		<dc:creator>Lynnette</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:53:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-13522</guid>
		<description>RoastedTomatoes, all I can say is that I completely agree.  I especially like your point about women as well as men being depicted in the Gospels as both saints and sinners

ECS, I&#039;ve often been tempted to take up a life of violent crime, but fortunately my sweet feminine nature has intervened.

Annegb, I can relate all too well to that image.

Theophilus, I think Kiskilili concisely summed up my point.  But just for the record, you&#039;re pretty much guaranteed to be dead on if you want to call me on the sin of pride.  I will say, however, that I&#039;m quite free of tinkling ornaments about my feet, bracelets, headbands, rings, and nose jewels.

Jessawhy, I also found Sheri Dew&#039;s style to be tremendously refreshing (even when I disagreed with what she was saying).  And I think you&#039;ve hit on the problem--speaking strongly and authoritatively has been traditionally coded as masculine or &quot;man-like.&quot;

And that&#039;s a good question about the meaning of &quot;nurture.&quot;  Hmm.  This is hardly anything earthshattering, but I usually think of it along the lines of acting in ways that encourage the growth and development of others.Â  Which is pretty vague, I&#039;m realizing.Â  (Then again, maybe &quot;nurture&quot; as we use it in the Church isn&#039;t actually meant to have any connection to the way it&#039;s defined in the dictionary or is used elsewhere in the world . . . ;))</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RoastedTomatoes, all I can say is that I completely agree.  I especially like your point about women as well as men being depicted in the Gospels as both saints and sinners</p>
<p>ECS, I&#8217;ve often been tempted to take up a life of violent crime, but fortunately my sweet feminine nature has intervened.</p>
<p>Annegb, I can relate all too well to that image.</p>
<p>Theophilus, I think Kiskilili concisely summed up my point.  But just for the record, you&#8217;re pretty much guaranteed to be dead on if you want to call me on the sin of pride.  I will say, however, that I&#8217;m quite free of tinkling ornaments about my feet, bracelets, headbands, rings, and nose jewels.</p>
<p>Jessawhy, I also found Sheri Dew&#8217;s style to be tremendously refreshing (even when I disagreed with what she was saying).  And I think you&#8217;ve hit on the problem&#8211;speaking strongly and authoritatively has been traditionally coded as masculine or &#8220;man-like.&#8221;</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s a good question about the meaning of &#8220;nurture.&#8221;  Hmm.  This is hardly anything earthshattering, but I usually think of it along the lines of acting in ways that encourage the growth and development of others.Â  Which is pretty vague, I&#8217;m realizing.Â  (Then again, maybe &#8220;nurture&#8221; as we use it in the Church isn&#8217;t actually meant to have any connection to the way it&#8217;s defined in the dictionary or is used elsewhere in the world . . . <img src='http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> )</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lynnette</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-13519</link>
		<dc:creator>Lynnette</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:05:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-13519</guid>
		<description>This is kind of getting into the territory of Kiskilili&#039;s latest post on masculinity, but I&#039;ve been thinking about the fact that, as Vada pointed out, Christ is held up as the example for both men and women.  That makes me believe that men and women are called to develop the same virtues, that there isn&#039;t a set of &quot;masculine&quot; ones and a set of &quot;feminine&quot; ones.  I therefore don&#039;t see a basis for encouraging women but not men to focus on developing attributes like gentleness or a nurturing nature--in fact, if it&#039;s true that women are more naturally nurturing, and this is a Christlike attribute, wouldn&#039;t it make sense to spend more time encouraging &lt;em&gt;men&lt;/em&gt; to be nurturing (since women would presumably be less in need of such a reminder)?  And if the &quot;ideal&quot; woman truly does exhibit different virtues and qualities that differ from those of the &quot;ideal&quot; man, why don&#039;t we women have a female Christ figure to pattern our lives after?

Proud Daughter of Eve, I&#039;m not sure I entirely understand your argument.  I&#039;ll grant that it might well be true, as you say, that &quot;women tend to be more community and consensus-oriented whereas men tend to be more hierarchial.&quot;  But even if that&#039;s the case, I&#039;d still see it as valuable for men to work on developing connection/relational skills, and women to work on developing leadership skills.  I see it as important not only for communities to have both of those dimensions, but for individual human beings to have them as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is kind of getting into the territory of Kiskilili&#8217;s latest post on masculinity, but I&#8217;ve been thinking about the fact that, as Vada pointed out, Christ is held up as the example for both men and women.  That makes me believe that men and women are called to develop the same virtues, that there isn&#8217;t a set of &#8220;masculine&#8221; ones and a set of &#8220;feminine&#8221; ones.  I therefore don&#8217;t see a basis for encouraging women but not men to focus on developing attributes like gentleness or a nurturing nature&#8211;in fact, if it&#8217;s true that women are more naturally nurturing, and this is a Christlike attribute, wouldn&#8217;t it make sense to spend more time encouraging <em>men</em> to be nurturing (since women would presumably be less in need of such a reminder)?  And if the &#8220;ideal&#8221; woman truly does exhibit different virtues and qualities that differ from those of the &#8220;ideal&#8221; man, why don&#8217;t we women have a female Christ figure to pattern our lives after?</p>
<p>Proud Daughter of Eve, I&#8217;m not sure I entirely understand your argument.  I&#8217;ll grant that it might well be true, as you say, that &#8220;women tend to be more community and consensus-oriented whereas men tend to be more hierarchial.&#8221;  But even if that&#8217;s the case, I&#8217;d still see it as valuable for men to work on developing connection/relational skills, and women to work on developing leadership skills.  I see it as important not only for communities to have both of those dimensions, but for individual human beings to have them as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jessawhy</title>
		<link>http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/02/07/the-natural-woman-enemy-to-god/#comment-13503</link>
		<dc:creator>jessawhy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2007 20:49:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2007/01/21/the-natural-woman/#comment-13503</guid>
		<description>Can someone define nurture? It reminds me of gardening, which I totally fail at, and I don&#039;t know how it really applies to life (motherhood, etc).
any thoughts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can someone define nurture? It reminds me of gardening, which I totally fail at, and I don&#8217;t know how it really applies to life (motherhood, etc).<br />
any thoughts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

