Outcomes of gender inequality

[Paidiske]

I have seldom encountered that attitude. Maybe from some of the hard-core conservative Catholics, but in general, I think Australian Christians probably have a more open/ecumenical mindset.

At least in Melbourne. I hear things are different in Sydney!

 

[mnphysicist]

I don't know how it is in your area, but here in the US most churches teach the attitude "WE (and only we) have the TRUTH the WHOLE TRUTH and NOTHING but the TRUTH." It breeds an arrogance against anything that would change that in any way. It has primarily been the leadership (both lay and ordained clergy) that have promulgated that attitude in the congregants.

That, plus an anti-historical, linguistic, and cultural lens provides for great political power which was leveraged a great deal in the 70's up through the 90's... but it goes back much further.

Consider the first bit of fundamentalist platform from the 1920's

The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.​

In isolation there is nothing to suggest "WE have the TRUTH, The Whole Truth..." , or an anti-historical, linguistic, and cultural lens.

The problem is that fundamentalism spun out of the modernist/fundamentalist divide which at its heart was higher criticism, of which historical linguistic and cultural lens play a significant role which led to pretty much wholesale rejection of it on the fundamentalist side. Such then was propagated through their Bible schools and even seminaries, leading to generations rejecting it. Add in a zest for power with the "we have the truth..." thing and such is where we are today. Alas, lightbulbs are coming on in places... but its tricky for many to navigate.

 

[Fantine]

In the United States, we are seeing a push towards traditionalism, and I really think it's a matter of "necessity being the mother of invention."

As technology robs our economy of jobs, it would sure be simpler if we had those good old traditional nuclear families with a stay-at-home-mom and one principal wage earner. We are heading towards a time where one job per family will be all the jobs our economy would be making, so a subtle and not so subtle push towards women going back to traditional roles would help the trend.

With populations stabilizing, there is hope that women might have slightly larger families.

Of course, for this to work (something the right wing hasn't figured out yet) is that that one job per family has to pay a living wage and have certain benefits--health care, pension.

It's a work in progress.

Is it right? I would prefer, personally, the European route--opportunity for all, with shorter work weeks and longer vacations to allow for technology's stealing jobs from workers.