Women Bishops!

Thank you Galen

As a feminist it is also possible to agree that women can (thankfully) be different to men but equal in value TriciaF!

Jobs/roles/skills are able to be done equally well by men or women, just not all men or all women!

There are 1000s of women who excel at roles that are 'traditionally' thought to be men's work and vice versa. It is about skill, ability and aptitude and each of us has potential. Some women would make appalling nurses but great brickies etc etc.

I find the thought that there are still gender specific jobs anachronistic.

Women don"t have the same physical strength, whatever anyone says !

And your point nonu is?
They used to say women couldn't be surgeons as they weren't strong enough, similarly soldiers pilots jockeys sailors bus drivers - need I go on?

Whatever anyone says I think some women can develop the same physical strength as men. Some men are naturally physically weak compared to some women.

E.G. Some women do and some men don't meet the fire fighter requirements.

My point Soutra , is that women do not have the same strength as men,
for manual work .
End of !!

<Le Sigh>

You can go on as long as you jolly well like Soutra.Don"t think anyone will stop you.

I have made ONE so**ing comment on this thread so WTF do you mean I can " go on as much as I jolly well like"? And adding does not make your comment any less personally insulting. Some women are considerably stronger than some men . End of. (But I thought this thread was about bishops not navvies - although women worked as navvies in WW I too)

Some women do not have the physical strength for manual work. Some women do.

When we lived next door to a farm, the wife there (aged over 70 and an artist by training and profession, who farmed part-time) would gaily toss around whole bales of hay that DH could barely lift - and she was not unfeminine. Perhaps none of the women you know have the strength, nonu but many do, and if they want and are able to do manual work, who is to stop them? Husbands who don't want them to be stronger than as strong as them?

Some men do not have the strength either. Adolescent males begin to put on muscle as a result of their male hormones, while adolescent girls do not, but if they use their muscles, girls can be as strong as boys.

Some of the best vicars I have ever known were women and I am sure they would have made excellent bishops. Good luck to them!

Did you watch the Forsyte Saga, Nonu ?

In one episode, a mother is walking with her child in daylight, and the child sees the moon in the sky. "Look, Mummy there is the moon!" "Don't be silly, darling, the moon comes out at night, and the sun by day. Everyone knows that" and she did not even look up to see what the child saw, the moon shining in the sky at the same time as the sun, because its orbit took it into a place where it could be seen before dark.

You did ask 'need I go on?', Soutra...

Oh lor' not the sort of thing you expect to be taken literally - except by the literal-minded.

Ahem.. to combine to two strands of the thread ..... bishops do not need physical strength to carry out their responsibilities so nothing to stop women being bishops unless women cannot be as spiritual / religious /political as men.

Wearing the fancy outfit and mitre and carrying the crook could be fairly hard work! (Sorry to be frivolous. I'll get my coat)

Frivolous is better than snippy, Elegran!

Every person in the world is equal.Every person in the world is different.Nobody male or female is more equal than the next.Richer, cleverer, stronger, none of that makes them more equal.This I truly believe,so I cannot be a feminist.What was accepted as the norm years ago,isn't accepted now,and vice versa.(evolution again) all this would have come about without the feminist movement.
As I'v already said,if you look in your history books,there has always been women in male roles.

Apart from any of that.Why on earth do some women want to be like men?
Truly genuine question.I don't get it,never have.
As I'v said before,nobody male or female would rule me,but I have never had the slightest desire to be like a man.just don't get it.

If you're so happy with your lot Mark1 why are you bashing on about it?

Banging on about it Jessm?
As a equal member of this group,I am merely adding my contribution in a adult debate.It is not my intention to offend.

I still contend that 9 times out of 10 , men are physically stronger than women.

Well, reading some of your posts above, I'd hate to interact with you when you are intending to offend then. . Just that you seem to have resurrected this post in order to announce that you are not a feminist and to do so repeatedly. The Mark1 doth protest rather a lot. Anyway do carry on, free speech and all that.

Noun..
If (generally) men and women were of equal strength,you would see them in sport on the same side,and competing against each other.Even in the services,the training is adapted for women.
Ok! Women's Army,fire away,tin hats on.

Genuine question here Markark1 - why isn't it possible for you to be a feminist if you believe in equality?

But you would agree that if even one in ten is strong enough to do it, they should be nothing to stop them being manual labourers if that is what they want to do?

That is also what some are forced to do to survive - women have been land girls, doing everything that farm workers would have done before they were called up for war.

Laundry workers used to scrub, lift and wring heavy sheets full of water. They were known for their muscular arms and strong hands - you didn't argue with a washerwoman.

Before the invention of the pram one of the tasks of a nursemaid was to carry the baby around everywhere, that must have got pretty tiring.

They have done other heavy work - carrying baskets of smashed stone for building dams, carrying water home daily on their heads for miles. They still do in some places.

Thank heaven for machines and technology - but those help men as well as women. We don't have to use muscle-power these days, but if we had to we could do it.