This episode was originally released in January 2019. Today we begin re-releasing our previous series on feminism as a fun little review before we kick off our new feminism series next week!

Since we released our first series on feminism, we have had a ton of follow-up questions, particularly in regards to what we had to say about the first wave of feminists and what their goals were. Today we answer those questions, and hope to offer a corrective of the pretty, doilied, snowglobe picture government education often gives us about this movement. We believe that the Prohibitionist Movement was evil, American chattel slavery was evil, and some of the key players in the Suffrage Movement were evil. We also believe that this movement, founded not on Biblical principles but humanistic principles, paved the way for the murder of millions, changed the face of the government itself, and is still negatively impacting us today. Tune in and find out how!

Episode Navigation

7:00 We quickly discuss some things we hope to accomplish and build on this year.

13:29 Why are we working through this again?

18:52 If you had a typical government education, you might think the original feminists were some nice Christian ladies who just wanted some equal rights.

23:27 Why can’t we be on the same team as the early feminists, even though we have points of agreement?

31:15 The first wave of feminists did not hold to Biblical ethics, and one of the outworkings of that can be seen in how they view the self, and how they looked to the government to address issues that the government is not biblically responsible for.

35:20 This is where we finally answer the question, “Why do you think Prohibitionism was immoral?”

37:22 Do we think that women should vote?

41:15 How has women gaining the vote change the role of the government?

45:00 Margaret Sanger began her work during the First Wave.

48:00 There is a biblical distinction between the roles of the government, church, and the family that the first wave feminists ignored.

Sheologians Homework

Did Women’s Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?

GET EXCLUSIVE CONTENT BY Supporting through PATREON

8 Comments

  1. Bethany Walter

    Hi! Are there any books you’d recommend to learn more about feminism?

    Reply
  2. Laurie Michael

    Thanks so much for this! I’m a relatively new listener so I went back and listened to all four Feminism is Poison episodes. As someone who grew up in church I had a belief that feminism is wrong but without much history or context as to why. These episodes helped me to put words and reasons as to why I reject the feminist agenda and embrace true Biblical womanhood!

    Reply
  3. Tony Higgens

    Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Lady Stanton had a lesbian relationship together. I would encourage you all to look more into the history and see that all of them were in rebellion.

    Reply
    • Summer Jaeger

      We definitely argue for their rebellion, but aren’t super interested in sexual gossip that can’t be confirmed.

      Reply
  4. Anonymous

    Inheritance rights before the first wave of feminism existed and coincided with biblical inheritance laws. Fathers pass inheritance to offspring not the wife. The wife is then protected and provided for by the offspring of father. You mentioned inheritance rights belong to wife which is not biblical. Also, the understanding that fathers protected and provided till husband takes over was not addressed here, which they rebelled against.

    Reply
    • Summer Jaeger

      You should read Numbers 27 🙂

      Reply
  5. Thiago Pimenta

    “Then Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,
    “The daughters of Zelophehad are right in their statements. You shall surely give them a possession for an inheritance among their father’s brothers, and you shall have the inheritance of their father pass on to them.
    Further, you shall speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘If a man dies 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝘀𝗼𝗻, 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗱𝗮𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗲𝗿.
    And if he has no daughter, then you shall give his inheritance to his brothers.
    And if he has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his father’s brothers.
    And if his father has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his blood relative in his own family, and he shall possess it; and it shall be a statutory judgment to the sons of Israel, just as Yahweh commanded Moses.’”” Numbers 27:6-11

    The comment said “Fathers pass inheritance to offspring not the wife”, notice it said 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝘀𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴, sons if there are any, then daughters if they have no son.
    Up until Feminist revolutionaries after the so called Enlightenment the practice within Christendom was based on God’s Word.
    Men managed the family property as the heads of the household and their wives, 1 Corinthians 11:3.

    Men and women being one flesh, meant that they had a single economy once married, managed by the husband, the head of the wife. This never contradicted the fact that God’s Word teaches that inheritance belongs to the offspring, not the wife. Only in the 19th century did this business of “separate economy” began, fueled by the Enlightenment’s unbelief and the budding Feminist movement.

    This is why 1 Timothy 5:8 is written in the original language in the masculine, you’ve applied this verse on your podcast to young, unmarried women, that wouldn’t cross the minds of pre-enlightenment/pre-feminist theologians.

    If you wanted a verse that has women helping other women (not providing for themselves and certainly not the Church out of their own independent hard labor) you could have used verse 16 in the same chapter.

    If you go back and read the quote from Numbers 27 you’ll see that the wife is 𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿 mentioned, only the offspring and male relatives, because in God’s old paths the women, both wives 𝗮𝗻𝗱 daughters, are to be provided for and protected by their husband or father, or closest male relative, read Numbers 30, women are always protected under a male authority. Even these daughters, if you continue reading, got married and under their husbands authority, husbands from the same tribe so that their inheritance wouldn’t leave the tribe and cause an imbalance with Moses’ division of the land between the tribes.

    Now women are being taught to walk out from under their father’s authority, provision and protection at 18, a concept not found in God’s Word, which says “𝗮 𝗺𝗮𝗻 shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24) and go risk their chastity and often their very faith and lives going alone to college and to work for strange men, getting sexually harassed in the workplace and risking rape as well. It’s as if today’s Pastors don’t think Ezekiel 33:1-20 applies to them.

    Also, young women are expected to just flip a switch and go back to a feminine role when they marry, after having spent who knows how many years in a masculine role, bad habits once formed are hard to unlearn.

    The justification used for this rebellion, namely that bad men under God’s rules could abuse women through them, also applies to bad parents and their children, to be consistent do we now need an equivalent to the Feminist movement aimed at children and parental authority, provision and protection?

    Have you and Joy read this yet?
    https://www.amazon.com/Satanic-Feminism-Liberator-Nineteenth-Century-Esotericism/dp/0190664479/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2DDU5HQIE19YC&keywords=satanic+feminism&qid=1641682649&sprefix=satanic+feminism%2Caps%2C70&sr=8-1

    Reply
  6. Percillia Brooks

    What are the sentiments you mention? I would like to read these. Thank you!

    Reply

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Feminism is Poison: Volume 1 Remix - Refcast - […] post Feminism is Poison: Volume 1 Remix appeared first on […]

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

©2021 Sheologians

©2021 Sheologians

Share This