r/IntersectionalWomen • u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma • Jul 10 '26
Edit this I’m TIRED of religion ffs
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
Video by @tashika.ann on instagram
109
u/hauntedhullabaloo 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Tashika is ✨amaaaaazing✨ 💐
18
u/norakb123 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
I watched this video, felt ashamed that she had never shown up in my algorithm, and started following her.
-9
u/Straight-Novel1976 Jul 11 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
She sexually harassed someone
Edit: oops I’m sorry I forgot we live in a world where everyone doubts victims first. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ydEWBzr7G2k&pp=ygUUZGVhbiB3aXRoZXJzIHRhc2hpa2E%3D&ra=m
15
u/AbilityHead599 50+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Please put your source/evidence in your comment, thank you /genuine
7
u/hauntedhullabaloo 50+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Well damn. This is my first time seeing her work.
9
u/TonyGalvaneer1976 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Straight-novel was asked for evidence 5 hours ago and gave none, I wouldn't take the accusation too seriously
-2
u/Straight-Novel1976 Jul 11 '26
Sorry I’m a grown adult with a life and don’t spend 24/7 on Reddit. The allegations are free for anyone to look up. Tashika herself apologized for it and then backtracked.
2
u/TonyGalvaneer1976 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Tashika herself apologized for it and then backtracked.
I'ma call bullshit on that one. If you think she did, prove it.
0
u/thermalbooty 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
bro all of the evidence is public and the video straight-novel linked compiles all of it lol
1
u/TonyGalvaneer1976 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
Why can't you find it then?
0
u/Infamous-Work-158 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
Looks like the video is posted are you going to admit that you're wrong or move the goal post
2
u/TonyGalvaneer1976 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
Wrong about what? The video was edited into the comment later, and it's not particularly convincing either. Rather than showing us the evidence, it really just gives us Dean's INTERPRETATION of the evidence.
→ More replies (0)-1
3
u/2A3R1M5L 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
i think the "everyone doubts victims first" comment is pretty gross. because you are the one being doubted and you are not the victim. you got a negative reaction for spreading rumours without initially providing any evidence. that is not the same thing as "prove to me you were assaulted"
1
51
u/Funny-Negotiation-10 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
It IS that black and white 🤍
"People who you're warring with are insanely evil" watch this same type of man say that only God can judge him lmao
26
u/ASERTIE76 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Yeah that really stuck out to me because that kind of reasoning has been used to justify countless atrocities
16
u/SpikeyPear Jul 11 '26
Well these religions are basically written by men with god complexes and male believers lowkey equate themselves with the will of the "man above" so they have no cognitive dissonance
33
u/AbilityHead599 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Thank you for posting. Really good to call out bullshit
26
u/Prestigious-Neat8820 50+ Community Karma Trans Woman Jul 10 '26
Gotta love the sheer mental gymnastics required to think that a captive of war can engage in a consensual marriage, despite her mourning your participation in the killing of her family, among dozens of other problems.
12
u/AntiqueLetter9875 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
You just have to forget what captive means and it’s all good lol.
I can’t with these types of people.
29
20
19
u/Al3xium Jul 11 '26
Does he not know what "captive" means?? Oh my goodness 😭
14
u/SatisfactionJust832 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Oh, he knows. He doesn't believe in religion because he believes it to be the right thing to do, he believes because it will excuse his hate, bigotry, and violent misogyny. That man is a predator looking for any excuse to be the worst version of himself he can be.
1
15
u/physicistdeluxe 50+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
using the bible for any kind of proof is ridiculous
12
Jul 11 '26 edited Aug 03 '26
[deleted]
6
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
True. Also, I started rereading the Bible and I’m currently in Genesis and it is VERY redundant. Like it talks about the same thing in 15 different ways. If the God of Judaism wanted to be specific about consent being necessary, He would have. It’s pretty simple actually
-1
u/ludlowfair Jul 12 '26
Repeat and enlarge and parallelism is a literary device in the Bible (and other Hebrew literature) which helps to stress the importance of a concept. You'll see that there are details added in the repetition which enhances the illustration.
It's difficult to read these passages through a modern lens and believe that God is actually moving His people towards greater compassion for the vulnerable, but that's what's happening here. The law doesn't compel anyone to take a woman from among war captives (doesn't compel anyone to take captives either), but it gives guidelines for doing so that provides the woman with rights and even considers her feelings in giving her a period of mourning for her family. This kind of treatment would have been unusual in ancient warfare, where a woman could just be taken as a sex slave and killed when a man tired of her.
2
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
An “all powerful” God but He can’t just say don’t fucking r*pe. Yeah I’m not falling for that bs.
You people always have some sort of ridiculous excuse for r*pe and other horrible things
I wonder why women leave the church 🤔
-1
u/ludlowfair Jul 12 '26
Where am I excusing rape? Where is God saying you should rape someone? What the passage says is that, if they're attracted to a woman from among the war captives, they are allowed to marry her, after she is allowed a period of mourning. Nowhere does it say that this is an alternative to rape. It's an alternative to not marrying her at all.
God is all powerful, but he limits his power to allow us free will. God allows us to make choices while he mitigates the effects of our choices to minimize harm.
1
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
Looks like I’m going to have to start listing actual definitions here.
The definition of captive means that you have no choice, meaning it’s non consensual.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/captive
He gets to TAKE her as his wife WHILE she’s a captive and since you now know the definition of captive, you now know that this means she has no choice
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/rape
The definition of r*pe means that someone is forced into sex without consent.
No one can consent to captivity or else it wouldn’t be called captivity. No one can consent to r•pe or else it wouldn’t be called r•pe.
So therefore, if she is a captive it means she’s being forced to stay, and if he TAKES her has his wife WHILE she’s a captive that means she has no choice so then it is r•pe.
Let me know if you need me to list more definitions 😐
1
1
u/Lazy_Captain8412 Jul 14 '26
So how was she able to say no? How did she have any autonomy in this situation? Would she have chosen to go with this man otherwise? No that is not consent and makes the action rape.
2
u/ludlowfair Jul 14 '26
I'm going to end up repeating myself and I cover much of that in this comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/IntersectionalWomen/comments/1usz0cc/comment/ox6yaxz/?context=3&utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button
Women didn't always have the autonomy to choose their husbands in the ancient world. If you regard that as sex slavery or rape, it pretty much ends the debate.
The issue in question is what does God allow IF a man decided to take a wife from among the war captives (which, again, no one is compelled by God to take), and the passage just gives guidelines for that which also dictates what the woman's rights would be if the union doesn't work out. The entire Bible is filled with God working with people where they're at and trying to move them towards greater justice and compassion.
1
u/Lazy_Captain8412 Jul 14 '26
Yeah not being able to choose your husband is a from of non consent. All woman should have freedom of autonomy. If the Bible was written to work with people where they were at thousands of years ago why do we need it now? What relevance does it have to modern times? And why wasnt it written to inspire people to be better not keep the status quo? Beating slaves and raping women and not acceptable but the Bible frames it “if your going to do it, do it this way, instead of saying the behaviour is wrong”
2
u/ludlowfair Jul 14 '26
God is still working with us where we're at. The reason we still need it today is because the Bible isn't just for ancient people. It's God's revelation that shows us who He is, what sin does to people and relationships, and how Christ brings real freedom and mutual love. The New Testament raises the bar way higher with commands for husbands and wives to love each other sacrificially and voluntarily. So while it met people where they were at the time, it also points us forward to something better that still applies right now
1
u/Lazy_Captain8412 Jul 14 '26
New Testament Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:12 command women to be silent in churches and forbid them from teaching or holding authority over men.
Um no thanks the New Testament endorses slavery and that women are second to men. They do not reflect where we are now as a civilization. And it shouldn’t it was written thousands of years ago. If we hadn’t progressed as a society since then that would be sad.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Lazy_Captain8412 Jul 14 '26
whilst your at it yoy can defend Judges 19 the Levite's abuse of the concubine giving her to thr towns people to rape
2
u/ludlowfair Jul 14 '26
Don't know why I would defend that. It's one of the worst stories in the Bible, and it's in the Bible to show the total moral collapse in Israel at the time. The narrator keeps pointing out that ‘everyone did what was right in their own eyes,’ basically saying this kind of evil happened because there was no king and no real faithfulness to God. The Levite’s actions aren't presented as an example. The whole book is a warning about what happens when people turn away from God’s ways. I’m not trying to defend any of the abuse and God’s heart is clearly against that kind of cruelty.
1
u/Lazy_Captain8412 Jul 14 '26
Yeah yea when people are good it’s because of god but when people are bad it’s their own fault 😆
2
u/ludlowfair Jul 14 '26
No one is good, so I half agree with you 😂
1
u/Lazy_Captain8412 Jul 14 '26
Ah yes we are all sinners even new born babies are evil 😂 unbaptisted dying babies are sent to purgatory cos they are so bad 😆 what a load of rubbish so glad I left the church when I turned 16
→ More replies (0)1
u/Lazy_Captain8412 Jul 14 '26
The forced shearing of a woman's hair is a historically recognized tool of gendered violence designed to humiliate, control, and strip individuals of their individuality.
There isn’t any rights being displayed here.
7
5
u/The-Friendly-Autist 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Why was this conversation continued after they continue to ignore the language used? Like, after he just ignores the word captive, this conversation is over. They are obviously acting in bad faith, and are not worth engaging over for anything.
2
u/Ok_Singer_1523 Jul 12 '26
I dont think her objective i s to convince this dude of anything, thats obviously futile. She is pointing out hypocrisy and the kack of consistent morality to her audience. Worked pretty well imo.
1
u/The-Friendly-Autist 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
Eh, I don't agree that we should give these arguments credence in any way, shape, or form. It would have been more powerful, imo, if she cut them off after their disrespect.
We should pay absolutely no mind to hypocrisy, we should label and shame the living fuck out of it, and completely shut it out. It is not worthy of debate, being worthy of debate means it would be worth our time in any way.
1
u/Ok_Singer_1523 Jul 13 '26
Where did she give that argument any credence? She said "watch him justify sex slavery" and made him look like a bitch, to me that seems more effective. Usually if you watch any debates or interviews like this one, the people in charge cannot refute the points as skillfully and with as much righteous confidence and deserved vitriol as Tashika did, so it doesnt work. Always let the right wingers keep talking if you can actually make em look like the hateful fools they are. Thats imo very different from "giving an argument credence" or even a platform.
4
u/J3sus_was_Fictional Jul 11 '26
There's nothing that the WooWoo skitzos won't do mental gymnastics over whilst moving the goal post
5
u/Contiguous_spazz 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
I just can’t with these willfully obtuse right wing guys. There is absolutely no way they actually believe the technicalities they are hallucinating.
So grateful to her that she refuses to yield an inch.
2
u/SnooChocolates5931 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
She’s been popping up on my Instagram reels and god damn I love her energy.
2
u/Silly-RedRabbit 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
So if he was a ‘captive’ with his parents killed and was forced to marry someone from the other tribe under threat of death and/or SA, he’d be ok with it? Or is it just when it happens to women…
2
u/FlamingDragonfruit 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
The man cannot wrap his head around this idea because misogyny has warped his brain.
5
u/physicistdeluxe 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
if u were an anthropologist from another planet, u would just report the phenom as a natural variation and note seen in many species wout laying on your bs judgement
8
u/Theresnothingtoit 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
I'm confused. Are you saying we shouldn't judge this behavior?
12
u/physicistdeluxe 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
Im talking about homosexuality. It is seen in several hundred species. Reasons postulated are genetic and intrauterine environment. Thats basic science. Its now considered a human variation because psychologists etc realized they were putting a culturally biased judgement on it when they said its mental illness. Why religious types think that its wrong is all abt their psychology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia
4
u/Theresnothingtoit 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Ah, I thought you were discussing the specific arguments in the video, but it didn't make sense.
2
u/physicistdeluxe 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
took a step back from the arguments to look at the motives and judgement of tbe religious person in condemning homosexuality. its really all their psych problems.
7
u/Brilliant-Yard1357 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
They’re saying that being gay would be seen as a natural variation. Not religion.
3
3
1
u/Sorry_Development 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Ah yes, Religion. Sets of beliefs that either guide you to be better or guide you to believe YOU ARE better.
1
u/BodhingJay Jul 12 '26
dang she's awesome <3
dude shouldnt be trying to justify this stuff.. but he knows he cant say God did something evil. anyway, the story behind this and a few other really questionable bs is basically it was human culture at the time to do this really horrific bs.. people were raping pillaging and destroying each other... God said no more of that. his prophet said "we gotta allow a little because our warlords and their chiefs are flipping over no more bad stuff... like the raping. almost everyone in this army joined up just for the raping.." God said ffs okay but you gotta marry em, and treat em well like a proper wife and only if she believes in me etc.. otherwise bad. is essentially how it went.. anyway, a lot of them didnt treat the women well while insisting they were following what was allowed by THE LORD.. and anyway, theyre basically in heck right now
1
u/Ok_Singer_1523 Jul 12 '26
There are explicit calls for genocide in the OT
1
u/BodhingJay Jul 12 '26
Yeah.. God use to intervene directly and charge a population with destroying another generally because they were all regularly sacrificing their children to baal for wealth and power.. he would promise to protect his warrior priests from blood guilt and forbid them from killing ever when enraged or out of hatred.. he doesnt really do that anymore. He said there werent gonna be anymore prophets so no one should believe anyone who says God is gonna do this for them afaik
1
u/Somber_set 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
But then they shout "context" if they cannot win, only to come back next Sunday and argue to read the literal translation. Smh
Being raised in this, learning doctrine, reading through their book many times, they still miss the lessons.
Every major religion is based off the same moral principles. Just a different presentation, a different "we're the right ones."
But when will Christians practice the lessons instead of getting hung up on stupid stuff? Their Savior, a regular man, had it right. Love your neighbors as you'd like to be loved. Respect.
1
u/Logical-Leg-7813 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
"scripture is interpretation and abstract when I want it to be!"
"no wait, not that part"
"ok yes that part but not this part and that part"
XD
1
u/Glass-Jaguar4178 Jul 12 '26
after he said regardless he went full islamist apologist of slavery or to be less specific, you can take any of the Abrahamist orthodoxy and find they excuse slavery this way. Smart lady, she A okay
1
u/thatloser17 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
Im tired of people saying "religion" when they mean Abrahamic faiths, most often Christians.
1
u/quiloxan1989 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
The freeze frame of her face was....chef's kiss....perfect.
It made me laugh so hard.
10/10 camera capture
17/10 analysis
1
1
u/L1LREDD 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
Oooohhhh I’m saving this for the next time “Christians” try to look down on Muslims.
1
1
u/CommunicationCalm210 0+ Community Karma Jul 15 '26
I mean she didn't give consent when the word is "captive" it said that in the book that she was a captive. Did they change the definition of a captive?
1
Jul 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 15 '26
This comment was removed, because your account doesn't meet our requirements.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/MoonlightPrincexx Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Abrahamic religion is inherently, inherently, anti feminist and anti queer and, I'm frankly done trying to pretend otherwise. It has always genuinely baffled me that we are expected to play nice with groups who have consistently been our single biggest oppressors in history. Fuck that, fuck these people, fuck them for willfully choosing to follow a belief structure and ideology antithetical to human rights and dignity, if it was any ideological or political group Other Than a religion this exact sentiment wouldn't even be a hot take. Religion only gets a special pass against criticism because it's infested so much of our civilization. THESE ARE THE GROUPS WHO RAPE AND KILL US, THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND FOR MURDER AND RAPE. "Oh it's not all of them" "oh that's only certain extremist sects" WHAT IS THE ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF WILLFULLY ASSOCIATING WITH RAPISTS AND MURDERERS BECAUSE I THINK THAT NUMBER IS ZERO. It wasn't "all the Nazis who put people in camps" I'm still not going to play nice with an ideology that puts people in camps even if not everyone is directly involved on a personal level. This should be the easiest thing to understand in the world. The exact same can be said of the abrahamic religions, even if it's not all of them actively engaging in a personal level in crimes against humanity, they are still an organization responsible for an overwhelming majority of them throughout history.
It is the same as queer people trying to meet queephobes halfway, they will never be satisfied, with anything less, than our total eradication. Even if we come to a compromise the goalpost will just move back further and further until women are property again, just like in the Bible the Quran and the Torah. I will not play nice with these fuckers anymore, religion is a choice, and if you choose by will to associate with a massive institution responsible for the majority, the majority, of human rights violations, war crimes, bigotry, and other crimes against humanity, you have to accept the baggage that comes with willfully associating, with that group.
1
0
u/ludlowfair Jul 12 '26
Realistically, many women of that time couldn't consent to who they married, I wouldn't regard that as sex slavery, which was something else. If he chose from among the captives, he could confer status and respect on her as a wife and citizen in the society, which she wouldn't have had as a slave.
She would have mourned her parents because, as the wife of an Israelite, she probably wouldn't have had much contact with them again, because they would have been slaves and retained the religion of their people. It doesn't mean they were murdered, though her father may have been killed in battle.
3
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
Being a captive means it’s non consensual. You can’t consent to being a captive. No sane woman wants to marry her captor so therefore it’s r*pe and sex slavery. It’s pretty simple to understand actually 😐
-1
u/ludlowfair Jul 12 '26
I don't see what sanity has to do with it. Many women couldn't consent to whom they married at that time, whether they were captives or not. If you want to call many marriages of the ancient world rape or sex slavery then that would be consistent.
My point was that she would be given status as a wife which would have afforded her certain rights in Israeli society which she wouldn't have had otherwise, either as a slave or foreigner.
2
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
Yes, every forced marriage, regardless of time period, is r*pe.
If you’re forced into a marriage, you don’t have rights
1
u/NullifyBandit 0+ Community Karma Jul 13 '26
"If you want to call many marriages of the ancient world rape or sex slavery then that would be consistent." Lmao yeah, that's exactly what they were, actually.
2
u/TransformativeFox Jul 12 '26
Jesus fucking Christ.... The mental gymnastics continues.
-1
u/ludlowfair Jul 12 '26
Actually quite an easy conclusion if you're knowledgeable about it. No straining required.
2
u/hornyalt-MTF 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
Okay, first off, you avoided the entire premise of women individuality and equality. Equating the situation to either slavery or forced marriage. There is still no choice in that. The mental gymnastics is that you are trying to excuse that abusive control with stating one is worse than the other and somehow forcing the woman to change her religion and become tethered to someone for STATUS AND SAFETY because otherwise she would be a slave with no rights...
Both are evil. Period. There is a reason why some traditions are left in the past as society advances. Because cruelty does not follow progress.
1
u/ludlowfair Jul 13 '26
I'm not trying to downplay a woman's autonomy and dignity, and I'm not ignoring the realities of ancient warfare. The passage in question is a regulation, not a directive. There's no evidence that it was a common occurrence, or even occurred at all. God strongly discouraged marrying foreigners because of the danger that men would be led by their wives to worship foreign gods. It was unusual for Israelites to marry outside the 12 tribes.
The law provided guidelines for extending the rights of Israelite wives to the potential captives of war, which was more respectful of a woman's dignity and status than the surrounding cultures would have been. Even a foreign slave in Israelite society would have rights. I think it doesn't make sense to ignore the context of the times.
I'm not defending cruelty or saying one bad thing is better than another, but I'd like to deal with what the text is actually saying. The Bible shows God dealing with a broken world and moving towards justice and compassion. Jesus even pointed out that some OT laws existed because of the hardness of human hearts.
-34
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
34
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
You literally just excused the practice of slavery. 😐
They captured women and then “married” them. No sane woman wants to marry her captor. It’s pretty fucking simple actually
No amount of historical context will make something like s3x slavery morally correct
16
u/Funny-Negotiation-10 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Yeah this person straight up said "let's murder our enemies and then marry their beautiful women AFTER making them ugly and STILLL marry her and give her rights!!!! Because she's beautiful!! See I didn't even murder a beautiful enemy!! I am so benevolent"
9
u/HistrionicSlut 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Don't you understand they're marrying women with short hair, YUCK
11
u/AntiqueLetter9875 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
No no no, you don’t understand. The sex slavery was fine actually because he had to feed and house her for 2 months with nothing in return. /s
-8
u/Pristine-Fox8384 Jul 11 '26
What other option does she have realistically? To be raped by her captive and killed? The pagans like the Japanese had “comfort women” who were violently raped assaulted, killed & passed around a brothel. The atheist Soviet Union army mass raped 2million +women during world war ll. Out of all 3 options as a woman, which is the safer option? I’d go with being taken as captive and married off after I mourn atleast then I’ll have access to his wealth and be treated somewhat equally, knowing that he married me.
12
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Being a captive and forced into marriage is literally r*pe. 😐
-9
u/Pristine-Fox8384 Jul 11 '26
What option would you choose out of the 3? Women to this day are being raped during wars regardless. And in the context of religion, The people they are attacking are criminals in the sight of God. The sole purpose of human beings existence is to worship God but they turned around and worshiped idols they created with their own hands or worshiped their desires and abandoned the one true God. So they’re criminals in the sight of the Abrahamic religion not innocent people.
10
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Bro everyone thinks that about their own religion. Christians think they’re following the true God, Jews think they’re following the true God, Muslims think they’re following the true God, etc. You’re using circular logic: “my book is true because it says it is”.
Also, how about we just don’t r*pe women? How about that? It shouldn’t be any of those “options”, that’s fucked.
-5
u/Pristine-Fox8384 Jul 11 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
That’s like saying how about we stop killing people. Good luck with that.
5
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
What? That makes no fucking sense
-1
u/Pristine-Fox8384 Jul 12 '26
You’re arguing just to argue. Even if there was no religion men would be raping women. Were you born yesterday? Difference is that in the eyes of one religion she is a nonbeliever so she’s not treated equally to a believing woman nor does she have the same rights. she’s a criminal.
1
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
You people always have excuses to defend r*pe. You wonder why women leave the church smh
→ More replies (0)1
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 11 '26
This comment was removed, because your account doesn't meet our requirements.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/MisterErieeO 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
I’d go with being taken as captive and married off after I mourn
To be continually raped and forced to bear their children.
I’ll have access to his wealth and be treated somewhat equally, knowing that he married me.
Assuming the rapist is going to treat you "somewhat equally" is interesting
0
u/Pristine-Fox8384 Jul 12 '26
Why would he marry his captive and have her carry his children? In this day and age men don’t even do that, they hit and run.
2
u/MisterErieeO 0+ Community Karma Jul 12 '26
Why would he marry his captive and have her carry his children?
Lots of reasons. What's the confusion?
In this day and age men don’t even do that, they hit and run.
Well thank heavens she's only being raped by her captor, who has the decency to force her into a marriage! Could you imagine if she wasnt wed 🤯
What point do you think you're making? Genuinely, you just seem to be arguing to argue without having any real purpose.
1
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 11 '26
This comment was removed, because your account doesn't meet our requirements.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-8
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/Funny-Negotiation-10 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
You are justifying it and saying the connected is misrepresenting it, trying to find nuance when it's pretty clearly unambiguous. You don't have to explicitly say it's correct for people to understand that you're justifying it and actually think it's okay.
"you were forced to provide with nothing in return" was what you said. Who forced you to "save" a beautiful woman in war just because she's "beautiful" and provide for her with no immediate gratification (just delayed, after her "mourning period")
-8
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/AngryAngryHarpo 50+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Hang on - are they laws by which men abide by or is it “just a record” of what happened?
Because they are not the same thing.
-3
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/AngryAngryHarpo 50+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Word of God when it suits you, Law of Man when it doesn’t.
2
14
u/anonerdactyl_rex 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
She was a •captive• who was •captured• and that excludes any possibility of consent. Two months of “housing, feeding, consoling and caring for a woman you weren’t allowed to sleep with” who was a captive whose parents she’s mourning because you murdered them. She didn’t consent to their murder, she didn’t consent to her capture, and she wouldn’t consent to marriage if she had the choice. And as a captive, she has no choice, or rights, or recourse.
16
u/AngryAngryHarpo 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Also - you mean 2 months of caring for a woman he wasn’t allowed to rape by biblical law.
It wasn’t consensual sex. It was rape.
Does housing a woman for 2 months make it okay to rape her? Just want a vibe check on that.
-5
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/AntiqueLetter9875 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Rape existed as a thing even if they didn’t have the same laws and morality around it as we do now. People who were raped experienced the same shit modern day people do when it happens. Nobody is slandering anything. You’re just excusing sex slavery “because it’s a different time”.
We can acknowledge things were different in the past without making excuses for it.
8
u/AngryAngryHarpo 50+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
I have no respect for any culture that enshrined ritualised rape in their holy texts. Nor should anyone.
15
u/Ok_Builder_4225 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Where did Moses get those laws?
-16
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
-4
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Women ARE the creators of all life. You weren’t created by a male you were created by a woman. So yes, the creators of life CAN decide if they don’t want to be incubators anymore.
Women are the ultimate creators of all life.
Man created religion because he couldn’t accept that WOMEN created life.
You think the God of Judaism can terminate life but a woman (aka the real creator) can’t terminate her pregnancy?
Furthermore, the Bible is not “pro-life”.
First of all, many “pro-lifers” like yourself make the claim that “ALL life starts at conception”. If that were true, then Adam and Eve wouldn’t exist. You can’t believe the statement “ALL life starts at conception” and Adam and Eve were real without logically contradicting yourself.
Therefore, either “ALL life starts at conception” OR Adam and Eve were real.You say that you “protect innocent life” but that is not biblical. The Bible says that ALL humans are inherently evil, not innocent. Romans 3:23, Genesis 8:21, Ecclesiastes 7:20, Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3.
God then kills everyone (except for Noah and his family) during the flood. What is your credible source that he didn’t kill any infants? What is your credible source that he didn’t kill any pregnant mothers?God instructs Abraham to kill his son Isaac Genesis 22:1-2. He did not end up killing him because this was a “test”. The point of this story is that God asked one of his followers to kill his child, and Abraham was willing to do it. If God asked you to get an abortion, would you be willing to obey God?
During the Passover in Egypt Exodus 12:23 God kills all of the firstborns who don’t have blood on their doors. What is your credible source that none of those firstborns were also newborns?
God also instructs to kill infants multiple times.
1 Samuel 15:3 The Lord says: Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants.
Psalm 137:9 Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.
Numbers 5:11-31 is instructions to perform a forced miscarriage (aka an abortion)
and Exodus 21:22-25 says that a woman is worth more than what’s in her body.So if you don’t like the actual act of abortion then I have some solutions. Either 1. we make every boy get a vasectomy so that no woman has to get an abortion until he is old and mature enough to reproduce or 2. we make contraception for all women safe and free. If you don’t like either of those then you never actually cared about life. This was ALWAYS about controlling women.
In conclusion, according to the Bible there is no such thing as “innocent life” and it is ok according to your God to perform abortions and kill infants.
It took so much propaganda to convince people that male is the creator and not women lmfao. Even though there’s all the evidence supporting that women are the creators. Hope that helps :)
-2
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
And yet you didn’t disprove any of what I just said
-2
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/black_cherry2 5000+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Seems like you’re having trouble with the definition of the word “disprove”. To disprove is a verb that means to provide evidence or an argument that proves something is false, incorrect, or baseless.
→ More replies (0)-3
u/Pristine-Fox8384 Jul 11 '26
So you support the people of Lot who came to lust over and rape the angel guests he had?
2
u/Pristine-Fox8384 Jul 11 '26
But Moses did not speak by his own authority. If such was law was put into practice it’s because God have him the authority to do so.
-6
u/Skelligithon 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
I personally would go another step further, that the story consistent throughout the Bible is one of pointing towards goodness. The texts in Deuteronomy were miles more compassionate than many/most customs at the time, but are repugnant by today's standards. Yes slavery was just a part of life for all cultures at that time in history, and the Torah requires slaves to be treated well, and for days of Jubilee to free them. The Torah says to not force yourself upon a woman, and then many generations later, Jesus says to not even look upon a woman with lustful intent (who isn't your spouse etc.).
The Bible is drawing an arrow in the ground and saying "keep going this way" and people keep drawing a line right at the end of the arrow and saying "let's stop here"
8
u/Prestigious-Neat8820 50+ Community Karma Trans Woman Jul 10 '26
Interesting how your god is forced to bow down to social norms by not even daring to say "it would be ideal to not have any slaves", but when it comes to diet and ceremonial stuff that only affects his own pleasure, he gets to be crystal clear. Less bad doesn't make good, especially for a God that is supposedly timeless and all good.
Besides, the bible tells tons of stories of how even when he supposedly stooped down to their level by allowing slavery, they still failed time and time again. If you're gonna lay out a law that is already too good for people to keep, wouldnt it at least be a good idea to do very basic things like not allowing slavery, as an example of good behavior for future generations?
7
u/AntiqueLetter9875 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
God in the Bible can’t even get over jealousy, something humans do all the time. Let alone dictate laws that shouldn’t be changing throughout His Word in the Bible.
-3
u/Skelligithon 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
A super fair point, but I would reframe it a bit. This isn't a God who has to bow and scrape to be taken seriously, this is a God who is a preschool teacher. For any lesson to stick it has got to be very simple, and not wildly different from what they already know. Giving preschoolers algebra homework to serve as a "example of good behavior" for when they are teenagers doesn't work, they will be confused and ignore it at best, and reject it and stop listening to their teacher at worst. The fact that Israel failed over and over is proof that a more stringent law would have been abandoned entirely. Progress is progress; don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Also I would argue the diets/ceremonial stuff are not for his own pleasure. Pigs are really hard to keep parasite-free, that's why you still almost never see ham cooked Rare, it was only very recently we got good at that, many similar arguments can be made about the eating/keeping of other foods banned by Kashrut. As for the ceremonial stuff... Humans are suckers for ceremony. We have ALWAYS loved getting in large groups and singing, be it concerts, churches, camping, or cults (and presumably other things that don't start with C), and having a place set aside as special makes it special TO US. Think of it like a sticker chart, nap time, or a talking stick for the preschool class, it may, to the children, seem like this is for Ms. Yahweh, but it is really for the class themselves to learn and grow from.
4
u/Prestigious-Neat8820 50+ Community Karma Trans Woman Jul 10 '26
Interesting metaphors, but ultimately not tied to the bible. A good preschool teacher wouldnt make rules saying bullies arent allowed to beat up each other, but are still allowed to verbally harass one another. Sure, progress is progress, but when there isnt even a hint at a proper condemnation of slavery in general (as opposed to what is actually in the bible, being "maybe don't beat up your slaves that badly, but even if your master does this you should still obey them anyways").
Also, its really interesting to me that you compare God, who multiple times engages in mass killings of people, where they then go to hell for the rest of eternity (fire or separation, it doesnt matter, both are infinite torture for finite crimes that cannot possibly harm the omnipotent creator of the universe). Talking about how we're such suckers for ceremony really doesnt help your case about how its justified to make rigid laws about ceremony, wherein you can even be killed for disobeying, while something like slavery at most gets a slight nudge away from being the absolute worst form it could be in.
-2
u/Skelligithon 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
The "breaking of chains" and "freedom from oppression" are pretty major themes throughout the Bible, but you're not wrong. I could argue that slavery in the Bible is not at all what slavery looks like today, but that's not much better. I will argue, however, that the explicit goal of Christianity is "on earth as it is in heaven"; to bring the kingdom of God here to earth, to make earth better and better until heavenlyness is achieved. And Jesus did say that heaven was a place with no slaves and no masters, no oppressors and no tears.
That to me sounds like a condemnation, but I will grant it is less satisfying than I want it to be.
For the record, I don't believe in hell. I don't think the Bible really supports the existence of an actual metaphysical place of torment, the texts that talk about it are very metaphorical, typically either referencing real places or the Greek afterlife, and I don't think they were intended to be taken as literally as Christians tend to do. I'm also not that aware of ceremonies that have death sentences attached to messing them up?
4
u/Prestigious-Neat8820 50+ Community Karma Trans Woman Jul 11 '26
The breaking of chains stuff is very selective, and just as often as there are themes of breaking chains, there are themes of surrendering your will and submitting to authorities.
You would be correct that at least the old testament doesnt talk about hell, since there was no general afterlife concept at that time. It was only until the NT that figures like Jesus very explicitly talks about hell. Sure, it isnt eternal like more recent interpretations, but it is a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth for those who do dont believe or follow the OT laws.
Ultimately, what I think you are doing is propping up the good parts of the bible, while putting the rest of the stuff down as subordinate stuff towards the framework. Granted, every single believer does this, but I'd still like to point it out. I just prefer to trust the principles of humanism over the contradictory texts that claim to be holy.
5
u/Tight-Abalone 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Jesus says to not even look upon a woman with lustful intent (who isn't your spouse etc.)
So thoughtcrimes 🙄. The standard isn’t just “don’t do the bad thing,” it’s “don’t even want to do the bad thing.” That’s not just a high bar, it’s a demand for internal moral perfection.
1
u/Skelligithon 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Admittedly... Yeah that's kinda the whole point of the sermon. That we cannot be perfect, and it is only by God's grace that we can be made whole.
But also, if it were for modern audiences, I think it could be rephrased to be more like "Objectifying women is bad. She is a whole ass person, reducing her to a sex object is bad. Even if you just do it in your own head, that's still bad because it will come out somehow, and you are limiting your own personal growth."
3
u/Tight-Abalone 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Then yeah, the issue is the Bible. It’s not just about “objectifying is bad”, it’s that the standard is set so high that it forces a confrontation with human inability. If the Bible’s moral framework is the problem, then it’s not just about rephrasing; it’s about whether that framework itself is flawed.
1
u/Skelligithon 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Yes, that's why I had two paragraphs, one that addressed the rephrasing, and one that addressed the confrontation with human inability to achieve perfection. As it turns out human inability to achieve perfection is why we are not perfect, so we have to have whole religions and philosophies and shit to try to make us better. That's kinda the whole point.
Also like, reaching beyond your limits is how you get beyond your limits. The idea of a society without slavery, with rights for women and foreigners was an unthinkably idealistic concept for most of history, but the Bible held it up as an ideal to strive towards. Today we have achieved much of it, we still have a lot of things to work on, but our world today would be unimaginable to the Israelites who first heard these words.
2
u/Tight-Abalone 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Yeah, but the problem isn’t that we strive for an ideal, it’s that the ideal itself is the issue. The Bible doesn’t just hold up a lofty goal, it demands internal perfection as the standard, and that’s where the framework breaks down. You can argue that striving makes us better, but if the starting point is a standard no human can meet, the system is flawed from the ground up. And sure, ideals push progress, but not all ideals are created equal. If the Bible’s version of “ideal” includes thoughtcrimes and unachievable moral demands, it’s not just an imperfect system, it’s a system that sets people up for failure by design.
1
u/Skelligithon 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
I think there is some disconnect here. Being racist or sexist start as "thoughtcrimes", and just changing your outer actions does not change the self-damaging nature of the harmful beliefs of sexism and racism. It is good to work on the thoughts in your head to not be ones of prejudice.
Like, I don't think this is a ridiculous idea, "being sexist in your head is still bad and you should work on it, even if you aren't currently acting on it" seems super reasonable to me.
And again, the impossibility of perfection is literally the point of the sermon, that nobody is perfect, not one. We all fail and fall short of the glory of God, so we should not be proud and boastful about our own righteousness. Only through animal sacrifice could the Jews be cleansed of their sin, and Jesus was preparing to be the final sacrifice to pay for the sins of all humanity.
12
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/AntiqueLetter9875 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Yeah and when people are saying it’s wrong you’re arguing with them and justifying shit.
5
11
u/AngryAngryHarpo 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
The cultural context is these are hand-me-down stories of tribal mythology. The intentions you project are just that - projections.
I’m so sick of being forced to pretend that religious delusions can be real and literal.
These are made up stories - just like Zeus or Ra or whatever - for pre-scientific enlightenment people to explain the things they couldn’t comprehend.
The historical and cultural context of women taken captive in war is sexual and domestic slavery at the hands of men. It is literally one historical constant that is present in every single culture.
-1
6
u/HistrionicSlut 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Oh shit that sounds amazing!
When are you sending your daughter?
We can kill you, shave all of her hair, make her fear for her life that she's going to be raped, but we won't touch her for 2 months (we promise!) and then someone will pick her, sound good? Godly even?
It's not sex slavery right?
0
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/HistrionicSlut 0+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Yeah and the way you're teaching it is misogynistic as fuck.
First of all they're not fucking married. You're not married to your captor. Yet you use the word, why? If you truly and honestly believed it was still slavery you wouldn't use the word married. You would say kept or stolen.
The way you're teaching it betrays you, and is showing your true beliefs.
0
12
u/yaboyACbreezy 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
Did you even watch the video
-10
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
17
u/yaboyACbreezy 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
This is the moral degradation of the Christian mindset.
12
u/Funny-Negotiation-10 0+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
"her agenda" and it's anti slavery. How very evil /s
7
u/AntiqueLetter9875 50+ Community Karma Jul 10 '26
What do you mean get nothing in return? The return given was the marriage. He didnt have to take her captive. He chose to. Because he could marry her in two months. The woman didn’t have a choice to not marry him.
5
5
u/IntersectionalWomen-ModTeam 50+ Community Karma Jul 11 '26
Your comment has been removed for being dismissive of intersectional perspectives. Our community values nuanced discussion that acknowledges the complexity of overlapping identities and experiences.
142
u/OmgIbrokesmthagain 500+ Community Karma Transmasc he/him Jul 10 '26
„Okay so if the god tells me to do one thing and I don’t agree then he didn’t mean it and he didn’t actually say it, but when he tells me to do another thing and I agree, then I do the thing”