REALity

[Paidion]

Have you ever heard of "realwomen"? This is an organization which promotes traditional values, morality and practice as opposed to modern feminism. My wife and I are both members (they don't discriminate against men).

You may want to check out this site and download the current April issue of their newletter "REALity".

http://www.realwomenofcanada.ca/

[nancyer]

Thank you, Paidon. I will check this out. Not nearly enough women subscribe to this mindset, whether Christian or not.

[Michelle]

Thanks for bringing this post back up, nancyer! I had forgotten that I wanted to look at this site. Paidion's link takes you to the current issue and I enjoyed looking at it very much. I've got to be honest and say that I was braced for anti-female bashing, but this organization seems to be very encouraging toward men, women, and families. It's very balanced and thoughtful, I believe.

[Paidion]

I was braced for anti-female bashing

I'm not clear on this. Do you mean bashing anti-females? Or bashing females?
It would hardly be bashing females since the publication is headed and operated by women.

Here is the organization's statement about themselves:

Formed in 1983, REAL Women of Canada is a non-partisan, non-denominational organization of women (and men) from all walks of life, occupations, social and economic backgrounds. Some members work full or part time outside the home, while some mainly work in the home.

Our name defines our aim. The word REAL is an acronym which means Realistic, Equal, Active, for Life.

REAL Women speaks for women who support the values of traditional family and marriage. We believe the family is the most important union in Canadian society. We see the fragmentation of the family as one of the major causes of disorder in society today.

What We Believe
Women are not all the same. We are individuals, extremely different in our needs and interests. No single group or ideology can represent the views of all women.

Equality for Women
Most women agree with the concept of equality for women, but there are different approaches to achieving equality. REAL Women believes the social and economic problems of women can be resolved only by considering the effects on family life and society as a whole. We believe the family, the basic unit in society. It is the ideal model to nurture the young, protect the vulnerable and care for the elderly.

Changes in Society
The traditional roles of homemaker, wife and mother have changed as new opportunities have emerged outside the home for women. One fact that has remained unchanged over the years is our need for family, children and other relationships. The majority of women (90%) want or have children.

Our many options have challenged women to find new ways to combine our roles in society with our personal needs and family responsibilities. A new women’s movement became necessary to integrate the requirements of family life into government legislation and policies.

Career Choices for Women
REAL Women supports career choices for women, including the option of remaining at home. Many women subordinate their careers, interests and financial needs of their families, by choosing to remain at home as full-time homemakers. Dedication to the role of motherhood should be encouraged, not discouraged, by tax laws and legislation. At the very least, government policies should remain neutral on the issue of career choice for women. Public policy should treat women at home and in the workplace equally.

It is true that REAL Women are social conservatives. They oppose abortion, homosexual marriage, and oppose the hatred of men fostered by some feminists.
I am glad that some in this forum are willing to consider their values. I posted the OP on another Christian site, and although one man was originally positively impressed, he was convinced by another person that REAL Women were bigoted because of his reference to the article against the illegal public nudity of homosexuals in "pride day" events, and the particular statements that were made on page 5 of the newsletter. He summed up his opposition with these words: "It's easy to be taken in by these sorts of groups. They usually have a veneer of respectability, but scratch it and they bleed pure poison."

You may want to examine the thread I started there:

http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/ ... =25&t=5524

Nancy and Michelle, if you find REAL Women's values important, you might consideer posting to the thread at the EU forum.

[TK]

I think michelle meant feminist bashing but I could be wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paidion]

Some of you may also wish to check out the website:

http://www.realwomenofcanada.ca/

[Michelle]

I meant female bashing. I think I started to write it a different way and changed my mind yet didn't edit all the way. Here's my explanation for why I said what I did:

I actually see an anti female slant in modern feminist rhetoric. I'll give you two examples. 1) A woman whose main focus is on nurturing families is seen as wasting her potential, and 2) unless you, as a christian, have the opportunity for leadership, your service to the body of Christ is negligible. To my mind, nurture is a term encompassing several highly desirable virtues, and servanthood is a grace and a facet of Christlikeness. I see them as feminine traits and as highly prized by all mankind, therefore the denigration of them is anti female.

However, often in response to modern feminism, what seems like an opposing sentiment is actually the other side of the same coin. This side says that feminine traits are inferior and, therefore, so are females. It's that dark voice that blames victims for their abuse/assaults and which shifts responsibility for whatever shortcomings the adherent bears to 'women today.'

A softer side of this dissent is the condescending voice that says, "Since you are a woman, your thinking is clouded by decades of feminist rhetoric, which prevents you from seeing the picture. Let me explain it simply for you..." While this tack might seem benign, it assumes that women are incapable of cogent thought or thoughtful dialogue. This is what I expected the REAL Women's website to be like.

Since radical feminists as a group are by and large (but not exclusively) women, it's not beyond the pale to fear that the backlash against this type of feminism might also include a number of women. 'Just defending my misapprehension here...

I will take a look at the other forum. Thanks, Paidion

[Paidion]

Thanks for that explanation, Michelle. If REAL Women were a group such as you had suspected, then they would be denigrating themselves! If you have read their newsletter, and have checked out their website, I'm sure you now understand that they are not at all as you anticipated. They do believe in family life and nurturing, and they do not believe in hating men. From what you have written in your post above, I think their position on various matters is much the same as your own.