Saying things like “That isn’t scholarly because it isn’t peer reviewed”

I am sorry, but when did something scholarly mean “put under a microscope” or truth?

We were so sure the Earth was flat once. We had scholars of our time decide that, Then scholars corrected themselves. It’s all opinion, regardless of how factual you say it is.

But we strive as people to make the best darn guesses we can. That in itself is scholarly….humanly flawed…humanly biased..all the things that follow us no matter how well we can temporarily detach ourselves from it.

Also, good stuff!! I did say I agree with the Goddess stuff. It’s all worth making main-steam for sure. Not going to be easy though.

Also…lol For women to have their “fair share” means equality…not the “opportunity to excel that…without ruining the institution”

To me, that sounds like this “really really very kinda sorta”

You know…fluff…political bs. Stuff that has no real value or content.

Equality is equality and fair is fair and there is no greater or less than it, As that would destroy its definition.

Please do not bastardize our English language more.

YES! I am very bored to be writing this

Also, this world is corrupt, to get your goals 100% you would probably have to dirty your hands and feel horrible about it. The choice is yours.

If you can gain this perfect equality without having to bastardize your own standing morales, awesome.

I do not appologize for upsetting people. I like to make people think. I didn’t post this to make friends and agree with everyone.

Not about the Goddess thing, about the Judaism

Since when were they ever a powerful tribe capable of killing 100′s of other tribes?

Considering they started from the humble origins of thieves and outcasts, almost gypsy like….hardly considered nation worthy.

I’ll agree the Middle Ages ruined any chance for women, but to blame the Jews is just wrong, despite how sexist they were as a whole. They were just too frail and weak to do much about it.

Romans erased a lot of religion, as did others. Please do more historical research. My Pagan ancestors fought ROMANS, not Jews.

And a lot of other tribes fought other tribes, not Jews. They are almost non-existent. If they were SOOOO important, why does Egypt have very little to say on them?

Eygpt will mention the Canaanites and others documented by Jewish text, but nothing big to say on Jews. In fact, contrary to popular belief, many “slaves” of pyramids were well fed Egypt born workers.

How do we know this? We dig up bodies and study them.

Just because the Jewish people have some of the oldest historical texts, is no reason to credit it as all true.

This is the indication that I get as well. There is certainly nothing wrong with unscholarly works – lets just call them that. Some of the greatest discoveries have been made by people who are not scholars or scholars doing something unscholarly.

I would not put it past our “kind” to destroy any remnants of a matriarchal society and overarching goddess religion. But without solid evidence, it sits on the hypothetical shelf. This is why I suggested Cynthia Eller’s work. Not only are there much better reasons for feminism, but that pseudo-history could actually hurt more than help (i.e. creationism, geocentrism, etc. has probably hurt Christianity more than it has helped it).

Let me first say that I have only skimmed Stone’s book, so I do not claim to know as much about it as those who read it in it’s entirety but that won’t stop me giving my “scholarly” opinion.

I believe at the beginning of Stone’s book, she admits that all of the pieces of the puzzle are not there to form a perfect hypothesis because much of this evidence has either been destroyed by malintentioned men or misconstrued during analysis because of the bias of sexism.

From there though, if the left over pieces were to form some sort of a picture, Stone then shows what that picture might have looked like. It is an artistic approach at the history of women. However, it is Stone’s assertion that a fully scholarly approach is impossible – because men have made it so.

I thought Steller1′s post to be of ultimate interest to women regardless of what men think of it. I was offering women who are interested in Stone’s work other female scholars’ viewpoints about the same subject. I could care less whether men or women think these women’s viewpoints are scholarly or not. That’s neither here nor there.

Forgive me for intruding where I obviously do not have the proper credentials to speak.

The majority of my professors and peers are female and none would so blindly take the position you have. The only thing you have argued is that I am sexist based on my position that I disagree with you and Stone about an hypothetical goddess movement.

“If you find the basis of anything I say entirely false, then why are you wasting your time with it?”

This is what we do. This is what people of a critical nature do. This is what academics do. If we don’t, we turn into thoughtless fundamentalists. I had no problem with the work as a opening into critical thinking as Stellar had originally posted the article. I have found truth in the “unscholarly” work of Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas (I continue to this day to believe that the Shroud of Turin was probably Jacques de Molay). Yet in this case people have created entire new religions, have used this as the basis of their feminism, and are completely disinterested in the truth.

I believe in not only the equality of women, but in many cases, the superiority of women. I believe that a women should not just be given a fair shake in academia, but that she should be given the opportunity to excel – BUT WITHOUT SACRIFICING THE CREDIBILITY OF THE INSTITUTION. And like I said, I believe Stone is a scholar, just as Richard Dawkins is. But this was not one of here scholarly works, just as The God Delusion isn’t his.

Some short articles I wrote on women and religion:
Buddhism
Christianity
Hinduism
Judaism
Islam
More Buddhism

Are you serous? “academic of sorts?” OOOO a sword fight about who’s read more academic journals than who. Do you ask male academics that?