YOU CAN STOP WONDERING NOW, JOBERT



In one of Jobert's entries, he presented a news clip from BBC about this letter to Roman Catholic bishops attacking radical feminism.

It states, "...The document, approved by the Pope, says feminism has 'inspired ideologies' that view men and women as enemies, and question family and marriage....It says feminism's view of equality has inspired ideologies which "call into question the family, in its natural two-parent structure of mother and father, and to make homosexuality and heterosexuality virtually equivalent..."

Dealing with the 'shoulds' about the role of men and women painfully structuralizes an institution which is supposed to purport 'unconditional' love. 'Unconditional' meaning, 'I love you and for that I uphold this union whether...'

We all know that there's more to marriage than merely playing house where I do this, this and this and you do that, that and that. It's holding each other's best interests at heart, taking care of each other's well-being, supporting each other's sincerest intentions of evolving into a more developed person.

A marriage may be deemed an institution or a structure but that alone doesn't contain nor maintain it. It is a partnership first and foremost, where, yes... couples ought to collaborate. But collaboration 'should' be done in sight of a goal that is equally beneficial, acceptable and desirable for both parties. It can hardly be considered a 'collaboration' if only one party is served, neither would it be a partnership if only one party is laden with the work.

Consider for instance the traditional family set-up where the husband earns the bread and butter and the wife makes the sandwich. The husband works for 40 hours a week, Monday to Friday. When the husband comes home, he waits for dinner to be served, takes his shower and do whatever he does to unwind. The same goes for his weekends. Why? Because he's been working all week and he needs to rest. But what about the wife? The wife is on board 24/7, no weekends, no holidays.

So of course, the wife will get grumpy in the long run. Of course, the wife will want something a little better, something else.

And for this she gets blamed for men going gay?

Now, it's true that the Pope did not prepare the document himself but by giving it his seal of approval, he has claimed responsibility for it and its contents. He suffers from Parkinson's and while I believe the disease doesn't compromise cognitive capabilities, I cannot believe he would approve a document that spares logic so irresponsibly. I dare say I would even go so far as to say that between this document and The Cat's take on the matter, I find more profundity in the latter.

The traditional role of women may have been the original plan but as it goes, not all original plans come to fruition in situ. Adjustments need to be made whenever one doesn't seem to work. Well, as Sassy pointed out in her comment, the Pope and his guys '...have never been husbands, have never had wives nor children.' That was the original plan too.

But we all know it doesn't seem to be working out. Now, does it?