From: vli@mpr.ca (Vincent Li)
Subject: Re: Chinese husbands....
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 00:32:30 GMT

In article <81375@ut-emx.uucp> onlit@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Drew) writes:
>In article <9674@emory.mathcs.emory.edu> cheung@mathcs.emory.edu writes:
>>Nah, I won't let my wife wear the pants in my family.
>>Not that anyone dominates in the family, we both put
>>our inputs together, but it is the husband that makes the
>>final decision and bears the responsibility. Why ?  Because
>>we are both Christians....
>
>Okay, it's your turn.  It's only because you are open-minded Christians.
>Had you both been grown up in a conservative christian culture, you would 
>have been sexist too.  Open you eyes.  The American culture for the most 
>part was originated from the protestant christian culture.  Yet, equality 
>between male and female has not been achieved up to now.  Don't be ridiculous
>to say that "Why ?  Because we are both Christians...."  
>
Is there such a thing as "open-minded Christian"? I don't think so, least
not the way I would define "open-minded". On the other hand, I don't think the
Christian faith itself is "sexist". Here's what I gathered from watching a
Chinese Christian TV show. It seems to be, like many other faiths, it's a
"don't rock the boat and cooperate" philosophy. Men and women are separated
into their respective duties in life. If each were content in their slot,
all is fine with the world. But as life evolved, the underlying philosophy
and the meaning of the words get twisted and distorted. Some feel they are
not getting what they deserve while others are abusing their rights. As
cooperation breaks down between people, the system just doesn't work anymore.
It's like the game of the "prisoner's dilemma", in which two prisoners are
totally separated and cannot communicate with each other. If they both
cooperated with each other and stick to their alibi, both will get off with
one year sentence. On the other hand, if one is to tell the truth while the
other stick to the alibi, the former will be free while the latter will get
a 5 year sentence. If both is to tell the truth, both will get the 5 year
sentence. Returning to this equality thing. I thought in that show, one of
the speakers gave an excellent analogy. When you take two shapes to make a
circle, both sides need not be identical half circles. And in our society,
is can take many different shapes. As long as it fits, we are cool. And to
take it a step further, it's when we try to make the halves to be of one
and only one shape that causes conflicts.

As for the "open-minded" bit earlier, when you accepts a faith, you are
accepting it literally on faith. So, when you become a Christian, there is
no room for other faith, and the Christian "truth" is the only truth.
There are the more "progressive" Christians versus the "fundamental"
Christians who thinks other lifeforms in the universe is absolutely impossible
and ET corrupts young minds. But what if Christians are wrong and, say,
Islam is right? Or may be, they are all right? That difference in the
faiths came not from the fundamental truth, but human's twisted interpretation?
You cannot accept something if you still question it, and when you stop
questioning...But, when you question, you rock the boat..But is that good
or bad? Hard to say, isn't it?

-- Vince

---------------------------------------
vli@mprgate.mpr.ca        |-) It works well under pressure: Another thing
                          |-] you can say about your pillow. -- Mr Boffo
Newsgroups: soc.culture.hongkong