Why are some people so fucking creepy?

I think I'm going to be ill.

Daddy's Girl: Courtship and a Father's Rights:

I don't feel qualified to discuss the role of sons, but it seems clear that there is a peculiar relationship between the father and the daughter. Since a daughter is, by the grace of God, always under authority--there being a transfer at marriage from a father's to a husband's--daughters are 'Daddy's' uniquely. While he must raise his sons to be loving husbands and fathers who make houses possible, he raises his daughters to be submissive, godly wives and wise mothers, to make houses homes. He raises a son to be a provider; he raises a daughter to be provided for.

Proud independence is no noble goal for a woman, and the spirit which pursues it is no part of a godly girl's trousseau. Of course, those who exalt independence, denying headship to a husband, will certainly deny it to a father. Thus, they find the idea of courtship offensive. But those who acknowledge that God's way is right (Luke 7:29, 35) find the idea of 'authoritative stewardship' quite pleasant!

What's the argument for the first paragraph? That a father, as a 'creator', has a right of sovereignty over his daughter. Because, you know, the mother didn't contribute anything. Because a woman is a lot like pot (yes, this is an actual example the author uses): she's there for you to put stuff in and to make the room look prettier.

Things get even worse further down.

Numbers 30 provides help in understanding God's view of the father/daughter relationship. "If a woman makes a vow to the Lord, and binds herself by an obligation, in her father's house, in her youth, and her father hears her vow and her obligation by which she has bound herself, and says nothing to her, then all her vows shall stand, and every obligation by which she has bound herself shall stand. But if her father should forbid her on the day he hears of it, none of her vows or her obligations by which she has bound herself shall stand, and the Lord will forgive her because her father had forbidden her."

In that scenario, a daughter has solemnly promised something to the Most High God, who has no superior. The father then hears of this vow, and on the day he hears of it, forbids her, saying, "No, Miriam, you may not do temple service on the 15th of Adar; we have to visit our relatives in Be'er Sheva that weekend." And the LORD will forgive her because her father had forbidden her. So much, then, for "God told me to disobey you, Daddy." Throughout Scripture, daughters are given in marriage; they do not give themselves and they may not be taken. [...]

The order of God, as indicated in his word, is that God himself defers to the will of the father when it comes to his daughter. God says, "You heard your father. The answer is no." Thus, the will of the father regarding his daughter IS the will of God.

Not only are good Christian women subordinate to their husbands and fathers, but they're subordinate because God considers women so subhuman that he doesn't even want to bother himself with them. This directly contradicts the Prostestant belief that no one needs an intermediary to come to God.

There's more not-so-subtle misogyny.

God has given fathers a lot of insight into the character, impulses and designs of young men. Flowers and sweet words might win the daughter; but Daddy's a man, and it's a lot harder to pass Daddy's tests. Further, a godly father is aware of his daughter's capabilities and needs, and can often see more clearly than she whether a young man is a complement to her and whether she can aid him in his calling. (my emphasis)

Father knows best, because a young woman is just dumb and horny, willing to open her legs to anyone who comes along with some pretty flowers and spoil that precious, precious virginity that's the only reason a godly man would be interested in her.

Some people wonder what my problem is with Christianity. Well, a lot of it is this misogynist shit. Never mind all that equality before God stuff;

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nore free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal 3:28)

No, the real problem is these harlots who think they can walk around as though they were PEOPLE, with the RIGHT and ABILITY to think for themselves.

(NB It is commonly believed that the misogynist Paul was the author of Galatians, which is why I was surprised to find this quote there. But apparently this is contested.)