Dear Hillary

Posted on by beautybeyondbones

Alright, that’s it.

I’m doing it.

The time has come.

I’m taking on …

the pantsuit.

dlGtWst

Womp. Womp. Sorry if that was a let down.

But in light of the recent political conventions, I have finally worked up the courage to talk about something that I have wanted to “tackle” for a long time.

The Pantsuit.

Or rather, what it stands for.

Now, some people may have watched the conventions and gotten all hot and bothered about the political “superheroes” in attendance. The brilliant/moving/potentially lifted speeches. The cause-for-concern weight of former presidents and their affinity for oversized balloons.


But I was focused on one thing: The Pantsuit.

Now, I must begin with this…it was so unfortunate that both the headlining women wore white. I mean, for the love, Melania Trump is a gosh darn vision in white. Not that Hillz wasn’t beautiful in her own right, but her stylist should have realized that she was wearing the same color as a former super model. And a pantsuit at that. It was a tragic oversight.


But I’m going to be really honest. I have some pretty strong feelings about pantsuits.

And pause: I’m not advocating that women should only wear ankle length skirts with closed toed flats. I mean, heaven forbid you show that calf!

No. That’s not what I’m talking about. #LoveMeSomeExpressEditorPants

I’m talking about what it stands for.

Or rather, how it has redefined something that I think is very important:

Femininity.

It’s such a hot button word: Feminist.

When people hear that word, – and I’m including myself in this – the image of angry, hairy arm-pitted women burning bras in a politically charged mob comes to mind. I mean, doesn’t it?

toronto-bra-burning_19792

And especially now, with people and shows like Lena Dunham’s Girls or Broad City, there’s been a redefinition and rebirth of intensity in what it means to be a feminist. And more specifically, what it means if you’re not a feminist.

And everyone has their two cents worth…or rather, their 140-characters worth on Twitter. Or, in Kim Kardashian’s case, your “two black censorship bars“-worth.

Everyone from Taylor Swift, to Shonda Rhimes, to Demi Lovato, to Beyonce, to … Hillary. Everyone chimes in on what it means to be a feminist.

So, I thought I would offer one more voice on the topic.

Because I am also a feminist. But not for the reasons that women fought for the pantsuit.

I am a feminist for two words:

Feminine Genius.

Now, if you’ve never heard that term before, you might be scratching your head…like…okay, we get it, you think you’re smart. 

fee17c90-1122-0133-5082-0ec273752cbd

Nope.

This term was coined by the late and great Pope John Paul II, or JP2 as he’s so lovingly referred.

And it defines what it means to be feminine in a biblical sense.

He defined the FG as this: the sincere gift of self.

And the very biological make up of a woman’s body communicates this.

We’ve all heard that women are the “crown of creation,” being created from man, saving the best for last. Made in the image of God, therefore reflecting His beauty. Duh.

But the feminine genius defines the very special and important role that women possess – nay, what they embody. The power and mystique we have, simply due to our very nature.

The female make up – it is different and important and powerful. We are receptors and guardians of life. We are biologically designed to bring life into the world. Every cell in our bodies is designed for that purpose. Biology don’t lie, people.

We are feelers, and in tune to those around us. Whether we are mothers in an actual physical sense or in a spiritual sense, we have the “wiring” to be caretakers. We yearn to meet the needs of others. We are lovers. We are people-centered — relational. Why do you think we care so much about The Bachelorette, or struggle with gossip? – It is because we care about people and their well being.

We are courageous and strong. Look at Mary – saying “yes”to carry Jesus in her womb. That was the prime example of the sincere gift of self. She was being obedient to God’s will, yet exercising her own free will, and giving of her own self- physically, emotionally and spiritually.


Am I saying that men don’t possess these traits? Absolutely not. Men are lovers, and feelers and courageous too. But differently.

Women have traits that are uniquely different. Uniquely important. Uniquely genius.

So does this mean that the role of a woman is in the kitchen meeting the needs of her family by making casseroles, popping out babies, changing bed linens and vacuuming the house in pearls and heels?

housewives-cleaning-family

No way, Jose.

It can, if that’s her calling. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

But that’s the genius aspect. A woman brings those traits with her and puts her unique feminine qualities into whatever she does. Whether that’s teaching, or nursing, or raising a family, or reaching people through marketing/advertising, or acting, or…leading a country.

It is those traits – of giving, empathy, courage, intuition, compassion, strength, poise, recognizing the talents in those around her and empowering others – those are precisely the qualities that make up a great leader. And a woman possesses them inherently.

We are uniquely different. And differently equal.

So. Back to the pantsuit.

Instead of trying to conform to what makes a man a man, why not celebrate the fact that, yes, I am a woman, and because of that, I bring unique qualities and talents and perspectives to the job, that make me equally and uniquely qualified to do it.

Leading a country means serving a country. It is a gift of self. Of inspiring and empowering the people.

A position that should be held by the most capable person for the job – man or woman.

Am I endorsing Hillary. No. There’s a lot more that goes into choosing a President that goes much deeper than a person’s gender. There’s … well … politics. The parties’ views on the US and our future are very different. And that is up to you to decide which issues top the list and sway your vote.

I would love to see a woman President. And think it is amazing that a woman is holding the nomination for a major party.

And I hope that the first woman president, whenever she’s elected, can confidently be sworn in wearing something other than a pantsuit. Because she’s not hiding her femininity, but celebrating her feminine genius, and embracing all the unique talents and qualities that she possesses in her very nature that make her equally qualified and able to do the job.

 

Published by

Unknown's avatar

beautybeyondbones

BBB: Because we're all recovering from something. // For speaking/business inquiries: beautybeyondbones@yahoo.com

246 thoughts on “Dear Hillary”

  2. Why is this the first time I have heard of “Feminine Genius?” It’s the very term for the thing I could never put my finger on: the thing of both power and grace, of spirit, emotions, intelligence, and body, that is the glory of womanhood that is God-designed! Gak! Eureka! Thank you for the term!
    Pantsuits are hilarious, and make for a great, catchy piece. But, if you haven’t already, I would love to hear more of your thoughts expounding upon Feminine Genius. This fills a huge gap in the conversation between angry feminists and tea-time church ladies. Both of whom I get!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hi Steph! Thanks for this! You’re right-it is so true when you really define it! So glad I could introduce it to you! Thanks so much-yes! I definitely get both too. It’s so hard to navigate this crazy world today, but I think when we keep our eyes on Him, we can’t go astray:) sending big hugs xox

      Like

  3. I remember when the Daily Californian (the UC Berkeley student newspaper) ran a swimsuit photo of the first woman to run the country (Nancy Reagan, natch). The caption criticized her “bat wings” (sagging upper arms).

    I’m glad that Hillary continues to nurture, regardless of her garb. She was cute as a button when she entered public office. As she explained upon leaving the State Department to rest up for her presidential bid: “Twenty years of sleep deprivation takes its toll.”

    And poor Bill. It seems that he’s experiencing his second childhood. I wonder if Hillary is serious about letting him run the economy.

    Like

  4. Regarding the “Feminine Genius”: I feel in love with it in middle school watching church gatherings. The men stood up front blabbing away, sounding important, and the women went around in the background and just got things done.

    The masculine genius has its place – principally when things have got to change. Unfortunately, having them in charge for so long has created a culture of “change for change’s sake” that (given that it’s far easier to change something by breaking it than it is to create something better) is generating a need for triage on a global scale. Maybe we’ll learn to listen to that “still quiet voice” which is a woman’s whispered counsel: “Not yet, dear.”

    Like

  5. I think I’m an FG too. But, to be fair some women can’t wear anything other than pant suits because they may have horrible varicose veins and people don’t want to see that. I mean could you focus on anything other than he veins if she wore a skirt? Ugh!

    Like

      1. LOL. Yep, she may have horrible legs with those spidery things and it makes her feel uncomfortable and would give people something to talk about. I don’t know. I’m just guessing. I’m all about a smart suit (occasionally) but I love a good dress and skirt.

        Like

    2. This, I think, is why my mother never wore dresses if she could help it (8 kids, you see. In her words, her legs looked ‘…like a roadmap in crazy-town’!) Even as mother of the bride/groom, her hemline brushed the floor when she walked, so as to not risk an updraft exposing her legs. She LOVED her pant suit and slacks.
      Back in the day, her detractors gave Hillary a lot of flack about the shape of her ankles, as if that’s the measure of a woman. I see her as a comfortable and confident woman, mother, and grandmother. More power to her (and soon!) 😉

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Thanks for this great perspective. Yeah, if you’re more comfortable and confident in pants, then more power to ya! It’s the person IN the clothes that really matters:) thanks for stopping by! Hh

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I love what she said “road map into crazy-town”. Very cool. Yes, I agree. Women are judged by our ankles or the size of our calves and it’s another beauty issue. I have accepted my wide calves and fat ankles and still rock the cute dresses, but I understand if other women choose not too. Heck, I may feel different when I’m in my late 50’s or 60’s.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. I personally don’t think Hilary’s pantsuits are flattering, but your post even goes beyond that. I love the idea of the Feminine Genius. I love how we are representations of God’s beautiful and nurturing side!

    Like

  8. Love this post! It is something I have felt for a long time. I wish women would stop trying to defend the ability to do anything a man can and start celebrating the unique gifts that define our gender. We are not the same as men and this is a good thing. We offer a side to humanity that men typically cannot understand. The difference is a beautiful thing!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. That picture of Bill Clinton with the giant balloon cracks me up. He has such a “ooo wow look at the pretty ballooooon” look on his face. 😆

    And, by the way, thank you so much for pointing this out: “There’s a lot more that goes into choosing a President that goes much deeper than a person’s gender. There’s … well … politics.” I firmly believe that if a woman becomes President, it should be because of her policies and what she stands for, not just because she happens to be a woman running for the presidency. I mean, we wouldn’t vote a man into office just because he’s a man. It should be the same way for a woman.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. A different…and really good…take on the election 🙂 I shouldn’t be surprised that you pressed on and cuffed her about the pantsuit issue 😉
    Seriously, the topic of being differently gifted is one that needs a lot more discussion, especially with respect to gender traditionalism. But I won’t be surprised to see it show up again in your writing.

    And yet…I wonder if you are delaying the posting of a picture (smile). Not like we haven’t enjoyed the angled partial shots…and maybe that’s your point, that it is just a partial portion of you, not the entirety of you that is shown more clearly and more definitively in the words and thoughts and spirit/Spirit of your posts.
    cheers 🙂

    Like

    1. Hi Jeff! thanks for this. You’re right, there’s a lot more to talk about on that. We’ve only just scratched the surface. And let me just say….it’s coming 🙂 I just uploaded the video to YouTube. Just waiting on them to verify my site and then I’ll be formally and officially introducing myself! so glad you stopped by! hugs and love xox

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Thank you for sharing this post and writing about “feminine genius”. I am not overly informed or interested in politics, so I’ll put that aside for now, but thank you for sharing to the world about being a true female and daughter of God, and how a man and woman are uniquely different in their own special, God-given ways – which is personally why I can’t stand all this talk about equality/feminism. God created man and woman in His own perfect image, but He didn’t create them to be exactly the same. We are all humans, but men have qualities different to women and vice versa. God knows what He’s doing and we should leave it at that! 🙂

    Like

  12. Nancy Reagan, as first lady from 80-88 made the pants suit a thing. My grandmother had one. It was a style then. Is it totally beautiful?? Nahhhhh. Hil looks loco in it and as far as I’m concerned its a has been style that SHOULD NOT come back!! No Hil, you can’t be all retro hip here. Not good. Follow this blogger here. SHE is beautiful!! Listen to her!!

    Liked by 1 person

  13. This is very thought provoking. Not saying I entirely agree nor disagree. I believe there is a feminine mystique that, yeah, is uniquely woman. A biologist friend once told me that it has to do with giving off certain chemicals or something. Can’t remember exactly. But not all women feel that way.

    As for men, well yeah, there is a male thing too. But not all men feel that way.

    The Bible was written in ancient times when these type of things were not questioned so much, if at all. To take it too literally might be a mistake imo. And doing so might hurt some people. But to ignore the feminine mystique as if it’s just a fable, that’s not right either. I go back and forth on this issue, to be honest. I just want the truth, as Lennon would have said…

    Like

      1. I find homosexuality an interesting topic. There is a Catholic writer, Michael Brown (formerly of the NY Times) who claims that it can be attributed to spiritual influences… i.e. female spirit in a male body, and vice versa. I have no idea but find it interesting that this idea is usually trumped by genetic, hormonal and other chemical theories.

        Best to you. 🙂

        Like

      3. He goes a bit too far, imo. In his book “Prayer of the Warrior” he decries TV shows like “Bewitched.” Still, he offers opinions rarely seen on mainstream media, which is good. One doesn’t have to agree with everything… 🙂

        Have a great day. xx

        Like

  15. I found myself laughing so hard randomly when i heard the word pant suits. Hillary indeed wants to wear pant suits because that’s what all the past presidents wore and she doesn’t want to disappoint. Though I feel she’s trying too hard to make the image that she’s a manly woman I feel. I’m actually scared she’s going to not step down when something like WW3 happens so that she won’t disappoint her manly audience, Though I also don’t think she’s in control – people are nervous of putting her in the position of president because well — she relies more on other people to get things done then see through to it herself and think for herself. I don’t like either of them; Trump or Hilary, both are terrible. If you guys need a break from USA politics we always have lots of space, cuddly animals and mountains just north of you in Canada!! =)

    Nam

    Like

  19. I liked this post. I agree about the desire to cover up legs because I know I am self-conscious about my legs. But I like the idea that if we are going to have a woman president, embrace the feminity. We don’t have to conform to everything male. Great post, well written.

    Like

  20. I am pretty sure the color white was chosen because it was the color of the suffragette movement, whose founders never saw the day women could vote. An homage to all who have worked tirelessly for equal opportunities for women–and that our children finally can see the day that an smart, intelligent, savvy human being is at the top of the major party ticket for the US presidential race–and happens to be a woman.

    I don’t care what the hell any of our presidential candidates are wearing. I know you meant to be funny, but it’s such a double standard to criticize/review what women running for office are WEARING rather than their merits/qualifications or not for the job.

    FWIW. Just my opinion.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hey friend. Thank you for this perspective. You really bring up a great point. I hope you understand that I wasn’t criticizing her fashion, but rather using it to speak to a larger issue. Because you’re right-a candidate’s fashion- Nay, a person’s fashion- doesn’t matter-it’s the person in the clothes that counts. I was simply using that particular item of clothing to speak to what I personally believe femininity means. Using the pants suit as a juxtaposition. I hope that was clear. Thank you so much for opening up this dialogue. Have a great night! Hh

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yes, I heard that in your post. I heard judginess in some of the comments, which I shouldn’t have read, or perhaps should have aimed some of my comment at the comments.
        Have a wonderful evening!

        Like

  24. I like the post, but don’t see the pant suit as denying femininity. It does show one of the norms that need to be broken and should be slowly worked on if she is able to complete this task. The idea that only men are proficient in business or superior in thinking. As a father of 5 girls, I do not want the idea of them wearing a skirt or a hairstyle to be a hindrance too their achievement. I also don’t want their skin color to close doors either. Hillary, from the last race, remembers the damage caused to her campaign by simply crying. Of all things!!!! With so many male voters, she understand this and should consider it lesson learned, thus, I suspect we will see pants suits through the election and probably 2 years into her presidency (if achieved) depending on how things are shaping up for a possible 2nd term. This will be interesting to watch and to experience.

    Like

    1. Thanks for this JDO, you’re right-this is going to be q VERY interesting November and election cycle. You bring up some really great points here-I agree, a woman should not be hindered by anything she wears or how she looks. That is so important. Thanks for this perspective. Hugs and love xox

      Liked by 1 person

  27. I get what you’re saying, but there are many legitimate reasons for a presidential candidate to wear a pantsuit instead of whatever else you’re proposing. I can only assume that you’re talking about dresses or blouses/skirts; I apologize if that isn’t what you mean. I can’t get in depth right now but it seems to me as if much of women’s clothing was designed to appeal to men’s sexuality rather than empower women so it would be greatly inappropriate to wear it if you were trying to lead a country (or honestly even a business).

    Still love reading your point of view, this is just mine. Maybe we can learn from one another.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hey there friend! Thank you for this perspective. Yeah, this wasn’t really meant to be a commentary on women’s fashion in the political realm, but more of a Segway into what feminism means to me. Haha that’s all. The pantsuit, to be honest, was a bit for humor with some underlying meaning. But I definitely appreciate your perspective and I love the dialogue! So glad you stopped by! Hugs and love xox

      Like

  29. I get your point. I’m all for being feminine and having feminist ideals. I do not live in my parents generation where if the man is hungry the woman makes his lunch. My husband can make his own dang lunch! But have we ever really seen Hillary in a dress or skirt? I think for her she just doesn’t feel comfortable in them, and some people don’t. I know a woman who only wears skirts because she just can’t stand pants. It’s nothing to do with her image of being feminine and projecting ‘woman’, she just doesn’t like the constricting nature of pants.

    I do wish the world could move beyond her clothes, or hair, or her appearance in general. It has nothing to do with her politics, or her abilities to govern a country. We could say don’t judge the book by the cover, but we all do it.

    Like

    1. Hi again Andrea! Haha that’s funny about lunch:) you really bring up a lot of great points. And I agree, we shouldn’t judge any one-especially politicians-on their clothing choices. I guess I was just using the pantsuit as a way to talk about the feminine genius-kind of a humorous intro into a serious topic. But I really appreciate your perspective! Love the dialogue. Big hugs xox

      Like

  31. You captured something about Hillary in both kith and kin (something my Father from Kintyre used to say)
    Her pantsuits are the tip of the iceberg! Her favorite shirt/blouse is the Mao Tse Tung drape.
    And this goes waaaay back for the Hippy girl Hillary – minus the flowers in her hair. Both Bill and Hillary were Hippies and protested everything from sweat shops to starving kids in..well, everywhere but Mao’s China.
    Even as a little girl, we see baby girl Hillary in a darling dress…with something white, like Quaker qualities draped over each shoulder…almost comical. In teenish years we found Hillary molding her personality with sweaters, all turtle-neck and unfashionable clothing. She was the typical, plain Jane, immersing her body in totally unattractive demure. She was the Unshaven armpits and legs of Jewish revolutionary movements and while it was believed that BILL was the Brains, aaand, he was brrrilliant!
    It was her somber and silent nods that sent ” juju eyeballs” ( intellectual Hippies) scanning John Lennon lyrics and Hillary’s sacred nod, looking for causes. Her dressing, with lots of Mao and Lennon’s. Baby Grand Piano. You had a movement.

    Like

  34. Think its a practical thing and she is more focused on what she wants to get across then what she looks like. Im more worried that both canditates are a little mature and this long campaign must be taking a huge toll on their health and perhaps althou very experienced its also about stamina. Think the Obamas were about the right age to become a Presidential family

    But about the Pantsuits.. maybe someone in the team around her – should encourage her to bring out this side of her sometimes

    Like

  36. ” Good article, interesting points, and most interesting colorful photograph of the color pallette of the latest and oldest pant suits. While I am not saying the name of the person that I would be voting for, since I don’t post politically, I will say this much, that what a candidate wears on the body will never distract me from voting for honesty, experience, determination, and also character, integrity, persistence, and good business sense. What a candidate “wears” should never be a distraction from the truth; that’s just my opinion. And sadly, there are many times when (some) candidates would love us to focus on fashion, whether they are wearing something classic or odd or out of the ordinary, I say, let us focus on what is real, what is true, and what is the best vote for our country”. No politics here, just the plain facts on whether fashion or lack of fashion deserves a vote or not. readmyphotos

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for this great reflection. I agree. Fashion definitely should not be a factor when deciding who to vote for. I hope that didn’t come across as my “take away” from the post because that was definitely not my intention or angle. I was just kind of using it as a humorous leeway into a more serious topic on the FG. thank you so much for you thoughts and taking the time to respond! Big hugs xox

      Like

  38. I know you have the right intentions, but I’m a bit disappointed that the entire election has been a critique on her looks. What she wears doesn’t need to define her, or women. I mean, for goodness sakes – perhaps she looks awful in a skirt? Perhaps she feels more comfortable in pants? Doesn’t your message suggest that we need to embrace ourselves? We’re trying to get rid of gender stereotypes – not build them up.

    I suppose it’s easy to align our views to that of a man’s when we’ve been raised in a patriarchal society. Can you now critique Trump’s insistence on wearing his toupee?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hi Samantha! Yeah, I agree-I wish looks wouldn’t even come into the equation when discussing people -politician or not. I guess I was just using the pantsuit as a leeway into talking about the feminine genius 🙂 I meant nothing more by it. I hope that was communicated. Thank you for reading and for sharing your perspective. Definitely a lot of food for thought 🙂 Hugs and love xox

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Women and men have different gifts and a healthy society needs all of those gifts, the feminine genius as well as the masculine genius. A bird can only fly with both wings. But at the moment can we see a de-valuing of maleness and feminity (or a peversion of its true original meaning) and some postmodern ideologists consider gender differences as insignificant and meaningless. They believe that there are no male and female gifts at all, with the consequence that some women became in many ways manlike or some mans real sissys (sorry, but that’s the truth)

      I suppose, this is one of the main reasons for the breakdown of marriages, divorces and the disruption of whole familys. The attraction between the sexes (physical, emotional, intellectual, spiritual…) lives from the polarity and the revelation of love, that we can experience only through the shared intimacy and the mutual enjoyment of the male and the female. If we deny the maleness of man and the feminity of women, we deny the gravitational pull of love between them.. and „man cannot live without love…. His life is senseless if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it.“ (John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis)
      I support the full and equal participation of women in all spheres of life, for it is the foundation of human development, but as a man I enjoy, love and celebrate the beauty of the feminine to much, to deny its uniqueness. It is my duty to protect it 🙂

      Like

      1. You have a duty to protect feminine uniqueness? Oh dear, Don Juan!

        Anyway, I’ll ignore that. You have an interesting viewpoint overall – I understand it’s actually quite a religious one. May I ask – have you seen the Ascent of Woman documentary on BBC/Netflix? I really encourage you to watch this. It talks about how women have been oppressed across time, across the globe, mostly because of ideological practice (which were mostly male-controlled). Ie. in China, Confucianism preached Yin and Yang, (yin, the moon, female/yang, the sun, male) where men and woman played roles in harmony and for various reasons (possibly because the sun is superior to the moon) it ended up that men still controlled women.

        I’m just conscious that over the last 4000 years of civilisation, women’s rights and value as an equal human being have gone up and down (but mainly down), because of the practice of men and religion/ideology. Whereas before this, it is believed that women and men lived in an egalitarian society where gender roles never existed (apart from the obvious biological ones)! People are so afraid of women being equal to men, but what they should be afraid of is religion and government enforcing ideologies on us all – like the one you are promoting.

        Marriage (as you speak of) should not be a Duty, or where roles are assigned. It should be done out of love, and working together to share the load. Love doesn’t oppress a gender based on what they choose to do with their lives.

        Like

      2. „You have a duty to protect feminine uniqueness? Oh dear, Don Juan!“

        Yes, God has designed me this way 😉 I would give my life for my wife, if I must protect her (that’s part of the male genius) But I don’t desire to be like Don Juan. I only desire to be Christ-Like.

        „It talks about how women have been oppressed across time, across the globe, mostly because of ideological practice (which were mostly male-controlled)“

        That’s right. But the Spirit of Oppression goes clearly against the Spirit of Christ. Man and women are both created in the image and likeness of god (this is the christian viewpoint). In other words: man and women are already equal in the eyes of god, with no distinction in their spiritual station, they have the same potential for intelligence and virtue. I belief that we need a balance between the male and the female forces/qualities/geniuses in this world.

        Man and women are like the two wings of one and the same bird of humanity, „wholly complementary, yet each sex uniquely and mysteriusly bearing God’s image – the imago Dei. Humans bear the image and likeness of God as male and female. And it is in this way, as men and women, that humanity is called to make visible the invisible Creator God on this planet.

        It is out of the diversity and distinctive separateness of male and female that we humans are called to not only reflect the image and likeness of God, but we also represent God in the stewardship of His good and wonderful creation (Genesis 1:28-29). Male and female also reflect God as they come together in unity in marriage and are joined as “one flesh” (see Genesis 2:23-24; Matthew 19: 3-6; Mark 10: 6-9; Ephesians 5:28-32). This coming together as one flesh is unique, in that the sexual union brings forth new life that will also somehow look like God and bear the imago Dei. As we are “fruitful and multiply and fill the earth,” we spread God’s image around the world (Genesis 1:28). 
        As it was from the beginning, so it is to this very day. “
        http://www.focusonthefamily.com/socialissues/sexuality/transgenderism/male-and-female-he-created-them-genesis-and-gods-design-of-two-sexes

        „But what they should be afraid of is religion and government enforcing ideologies on us all – like the one you are promoting.“

        I am a promoter of religious liberty and the independent investigation of truth 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      3. @Samantha: …. a very important reference: God didn’t give man dominion over the earth until his woman was standing beside Him. That says a lot! Be blessed, Mark

        Like

  39. Hello! 😉 I highly recommend to you this speech from Danny Silk about this topic:

    Be blessed and stay tuned,

    Mark

    Like

  41. Agreed! the feminist movement has changed drastically since it first started. And you are right, the agenda is basically to become man lol in erasing our uniqueness they are erasing families and even displacing the roles of men. Unfortunately most who speak of true feminism get their heads chewed off, course most Christian centered topics tend to nowadays. thank you for the post!

    Liked by 1 person

  42. Could she be celebrating her femininity with wearing what she feels comfortable in, rather than what someone else seems feminine?

    Like

  43. Bravo!!! You have a way with your words. Mixing humor with realism.
    I also appreciate your biblical input within your post as I feel our society has forgotten our history or as some may say, the old ways.
    Please do keep posting!

    Like

Join the Conversation!