~ archived since 2018 ~

A sign up sheet for men in my church to substitute in the primary (kids under 12).

August 10, 2014
287 upvotes

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/MensRights.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

Post Information
Title A sign up sheet for men in my church to substitute in the primary (kids under 12).
Author thelotusknyte
Upvotes 287
Comments 92
Date August 10, 2014 9:35 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit /r/MensRights
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/a-sign-up-sheet-for-men-in-my-church-to-substitute.997112
https://theredarchive.com/post/997112
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2d6ets/a_sign_up_sheet_for_men_in_my_church_to/
Comments

[–]redgreenyellowblu 64 points65 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

The sad thing is is that the church is acting in your best interest by doing that. You, as a man, or much more likely to be falsely accused, or have your reputation ruined by some dumb teenaged girl that decides to call you a creeper. The church is also acting in its own best legal interest. You ca't change the fact that men are assumed rapists nowadays. It will be a long fight, but, in the meantime, everyone should do whatever necessary to protect themselves.

That being said, the church should have a gender neutral policy on this to both not insult men and to stop perpetuating the men as predators trope. No adult is allowed alone with children. Totally stupid policy but at least it's fair as far as gender.

I suggest telling the church you would love to volunteer but that you cannot given the offensive and damaging nature of their policy. Discuss with other men at the church and insist on a policy change.

[–]60secs 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Those policies are church wide for millions of members, not for a specific parish.

[–]baskandpurr 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree they church is doing the best thing but it does stop men from helping. I was asked to paint a mural in the hall of a local church, the mural was going to be very large and the priest wanted to get local children involved in painting it. I had to say no to whole idea.

Even if the children weren't directly invovled, maybe I would be in room at the same time as those children. Maybe the children would talk to me about what I was doing. Maybe the mothers would get angry because their children weren't allowed to get involved. Maybe saying no looked suspicious, what was I hiding? Maybe they had a rule like this just in case I was tempted to molest the children. Maybe I could have asked for such a rule, imagine how that looks?

Accepting this rule amounts to admitting that its a risk. Of course I'm not going to harm those children so theoretically I should be safe. But that doesn't matter when the accusation is enough. I could not put myself in a position to be accused so I had to say no. It's a shame because I very much enjoy being around children, especially dealing with art, but the risk comes from the mothers and the stakes are far too high.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Came here to say this.

[–]AKnightAlone -5 points-4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Considering how often sexual abuse occurs in church settings and because of males, I can almost say this is sensible. I hate ignorant discrimination, but even more, I hate ignorance toward reality. I wish men weren't discriminated against regarding situations of authority involving children, but abusive men will so often specifically seek out these positions.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You got any numbers or a source for this?

[–]20rakah -1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

my finger got tired scrolling down that page

[–]autowikibot 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Catholic sex abuse cases:


The Catholic sex abuse cases are a series of allegations, investigations, trials and convictions of child sexual abuse crimes committed by Catholic priests, nuns and members of Roman Catholic orders against children as young as three years old with the majority between the ages of 11 and 14. Many of the cases span several decades and are brought forward years after the abuse occurred. Cases have also been brought against members of the Catholic hierarchy who did not report sex abuse allegations to the legal authorities. It has been shown they deliberately moved sexually abusive priests to other parishes where the abuse sometimes continued. This has led to a number of fraud cases where the Church has been accused of misleading victims by deliberately relocating priests accused of abuse instead of removing them from their positions.

Image i - Graffiti on a wall in Lisbon depicting a priest chasing two children, denouncing the child sexual abuse that rocked the Catholic Church.


Interesting: Ecclesiastical response to Catholic sex abuse cases | Roman Catholic sex abuse cases by country | Catholic sex abuse cases in the United States | Media coverage of Catholic sex abuse cases

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words

[–]anobaith 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

So will abusive women. As time marches forward, and woman are given a chance to succeed or fail, reality shows women are just as bad.

Considering how homosexual activists continue to sabotage the MRM from the inside out(trying to start fights between African American and European American MRA's, empowering atheists to engage in religious bigotry and stoking political division between left leaning and right leaning MRA's), the reality of the situation is that the presence of individuals such as yourself, makes feminists mute. With MHRA's like yourself(and all MHRA), who needs enemies?

[–]Shakimah -4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The sad thing is is that the church is acting in your best interest by doing that. You, as a man, or much more likely to be falsely accused, or have your reputation ruined by some dumb teenaged girl that decides to call you a creeper. The church is also acting in its own best legal interest. You ca't change the fact that men are assumed rapists nowadays. It will be a long fight, but, in the meantime, everyone should do whatever necessary to protect themselves.

Have you considered the issue of sexual abuse of boys, by men, in churches? Do you think that that is irrelevant to this?

[–]kizzan 33 points34 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

Does that sheet mean that a woman can be alone with a child but if it is a man, two adults need to be present?

[–]GiskardReventlov 14 points15 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Exception that proves the rule:


"The exception [that] proves the rule" means that the presence of an exception applying to a specific case establishes ("proves") that a general rule exists. For example, a sign that says "parking prohibited on Sundays" (the exception) "proves" that parking is allowed on the other six days of the week (the rule). A more explicit phrasing might be "The exception that proves the existence of the rule."


Interesting: La Excepción | Bateman's principle | The Paltry Nude Starts on a Spring Voyage | Wizard's First Rule

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words

[–]panda_samawich 2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]kizzan 1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

11.8.1 says that men need two people unless the church is too small that it is impractical to do that. But my question is, is there a double standard? Is there a section that talks about women teachers?

[–]Atkailash 8 points9 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

That link shows the handbook, since it's not stated, a female teacher would not need another person.

Also note that 11.2.2 exclusively uses the female pronoun, the leadership will be just women. I want to say that it's because primary is under the Relief Society which is the female group of the church (men have the priesthood) but I'm not sure.

[–]kizzan 8 points9 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I see that. To me it seems okay if men have different roles than women, but if men are treated like potential threats and need to have dual custody but women don't, that would be very offensive to me.

[–]Atkailash 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

That's what's happening here, it's not a role thing but an obvious different standard.

[–]kizzan 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well that sucks. Feminism even affects the Mormon church.

[–]Atkailash 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Not really sure what that has to do with this really

[–]kizzan 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Okay thank you!

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

That is how I read it. If the rule was gender neutral then there wouldn't be anything to complain about.

[–]kizzan 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Yeah you are probably right.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

The flip side of what I read.

After reading through the thread it sounds to me like this isn't the decision of a single church. That these are rules that have been handed out 'from above'.

If this WAS a decision from a single church, then I would suggest that coming to them, pointing out the discrimination and asking for it to simply be reworded would be worthy of your time. (as others have said, there is a bright side to this. it makes it harder to be falsley accused)

But the reality is it was handed down from on high. They won't budge.

LMS. Isn't LMS Mormons? Good luck fining a different place.

[–]kizzan 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah this is from higher up in the Mormon church. But don't Mormons say that men can marry multiple wives? I don't think this church is anti-male. I am not a member of that church so I could be mistaken.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

They haven't said that in a good long while. Except for a few fringe groups.

[–]kizzan 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh okay.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You make a good point.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

At least they acknowledge that men can be responsible adults, at least when watching over a suspect-by-nature male.

Given the hysterical nature of some countries over the issue, it seems like good practice to require this for all adults caring for children, regardless of gender; two adults minimum at all times. Too bad they can't just have everything on surveillance, for iron-clad proof of whether an allegation has substance.

[–]Phototoxin 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's surely the definition of sexist.

[–]whats_up_doc 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This kind of an attitude has been creeping into the church for a couple of decades now.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Ditch the church. Better still do not go to one.

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

A faith community can be essential for men and women. Whatever your issues with the religious or non-religious don't just casually tell people to abandon there community.

[–]Endless_Summer -5 points-4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

A faith community? Where you believe in feels not reals? Hmmm, now what does that sound like..... Tumblr!

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

If their community shits on them, we can damned well tell people to abandon that community.

I would never set foot in one of these church's, because I have self respect.

[–]duglock 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Church I attend just instituted a policy just like this due to the Youth Minister getting arrested for molesting 25-30 little boys. Pretty fucked up and with emotions running so high no one really gives a shit about the sexism. Think I will probably take your advice. Not the second part though.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 2 points3 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

"Patriarchal" Christianity strikes again.

[–]mawbles 1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Not Christianity, that's actually from a mormon, as someone else posted above.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Don't they believe Christ was the Messiah? And if so, why would that not make them Christians?

[–]Vegemeister 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I am deeply amused by how closely the quotation and citation style follows usual practice for bible quotes.

[–]Karma9999 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

"Just say No"

[–]td9red 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

What are the requirements for female substitute teachers?

[–]jaheiner 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, my church had a very similar rule.

A male teacher could not take kids to bathroom breaks either, had to be a female teacher.

Hard not to feel a bit put off of serving in that ministry as it felt like being accused of something.

I'm not sure what bothers me more though, the feeling like our sex is stereotyped to the point where things like this are necessary, or the fact that there is a part of me that (when the time comes and my wife and I have kids) would feel more comfortable with a woman taking them to the bathroom...

[–]j-dawg-94 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I die a little inside whenever this religious shit gets upvoted on a gender related subreddit. Like if you're in favor of almost all religion then you're going to have to forgo quite a bit of gender equality.

[–]thescientist8371 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You're trying to find reason and equality in a church? Good luck with that.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's about where I'm at on this. Like, if you're going to talk about double standards for gender, Christianity kinda has a long history of dramatically more interesting offences, to all possible angles. Seems like a very odd context in which to care. Just like I explain when I'm telling people I electively only adopt entertaining good-luck superstitions, "No reason to expect something to be logically consistent when it's not logical in the first place".

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Why the fuck would any man volunteer under these circumstances?

To be honest, I have trouble understanding why men even go to church. I have never seen a church in America that isn't openly hostile to men, and mostly run by women.

[–]cashmunnymillionaire 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You've never been inside any southern churches then. My liberal Presbyterian church had a balance of female and male clergy, sunday school teachers, and deacons/elders, and was never hostile towards men working with children, including teenage boys working in the nursery. Churches provide a lot of benefit when you go to one that focuses on the right things.

Also, as an aside, everybody who says they didn't need a church to instill morality in them either have never been in a church or are trying to minimize the role it had in their early development. I'm not institutionally religious anymore, but the best part about growing up in a church was the fact that I wasn't just relying on what my parents told me to figure out what was right or wrong. If that had been the case, I'd have become less of a critical thinker. Non-religious and Atheiststm like to pretend that religious institutions are monolithic, which isn't the case, even in the rigid hierarchy of the Catholic church. A church community helps articulate nuanced views about moral grey areas because you interact with members of that faith community in a setting which forces those relativistic viewpoints on the table.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter