Closed Thread Icon

Topic awaiting preservation: Women, God, and the Bible. (Page 1 of 1) Pages that link to <a href="http://ozoneasylum.com/backlink?for=14143" title="Pages that link to Topic awaiting preservation: Women, God, and the Bible. (Page 1 of 1)" rel="nofollow" >Topic awaiting preservation: Women, God, and the Bible. <span class="small">(Page 1 of 1)</span>\

 
WebShaman
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: Happy Hunting Grounds...
Insane since: Mar 2001

posted posted 03-14-2003 08:50

After discussing this somewhat, Bugs suggested starting a thread on the subject, so here it is.

Where are the voice of women in the Bible? (In this, I mean writs). Why are women portrayed so badly in the Bible?


WebShaman

counterfeitbacon
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Vancouver, WA
Insane since: Apr 2002

posted posted 03-14-2003 10:00

It's the time period that it was written in, and the culture. Even in stories like Esther women are oppressed. It's not that they don't have a role in the Bible/Christianity, it's that the culture pushed them to the back of society as "stay at home and make baby machines." I mean, and of course everyone knows this, women were portrayed badly up untill the 50's and 60's in the US.

(Everything is based on my unknowledgeably semi-knowledge, and is just MHO)

velvetrose
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: overlooking the bay
Insane since: Apr 2001

posted posted 03-14-2003 11:27

xians may not hear about Esther much, but in the jewish world her story is celebrated yearly and read aloud as part of the Purim festival. the "whole megillah" is read, not just a shortened version.

[edit: she was not oppressed (though her role then fit the times) ...

[This message has been edited by velvetrose (edited 03-14-2003).]

WebShaman
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: Happy Hunting Grounds...
Insane since: Mar 2001

posted posted 03-14-2003 15:26

Yes, but the Bible is supposed to be 'Divinely Inspired'...so what is this saying about God, then? That it is biased towards women? Doesn't this give evidence to the idea, that the Bible was written by men?

NoJive
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: The Land of one Headlight on.
Insane since: May 2001

posted posted 03-14-2003 15:35

Hardcore xtians still in this day and age along with fundamentalists of all stripes operate on the premise that god is male. There's scant chance with this reasoning that the lot of women would be given a serious audience then or now. It will never change. (unless of course she has a rather husky voice) =)

DL-44
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: under the bed
Insane since: Feb 2000

posted posted 03-14-2003 18:18

WS - it is obviously a predominantly patriarchal collection, as are most religious writings from that general region.

Many christians, especially catholics (from my experience anyway) still hold to very strong male-dominance beleifs (you still hear the bit about "to honor and obey" in wedding vows).

I know a woman who married a catholic man. They had a meeting with the priest before hand, in which she was 'instructed' by the priest that she must obey her husband, never contradict him, and never deny him under any circumstances.

After all, woman was only created as a 'helpmeet' to man




[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 03-14-2003).]

GrythusDraconis
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: The Astral Plane
Insane since: Jul 2002

posted posted 03-14-2003 18:28

While it may have been divinely inspired that doesn't mean the authors didn't have any latitude in their scribing. The bible was more acceptable in that time frame written as it is. Granted that shouldn't apply now, but at the time it was acceptable.

Xian converts from south America are steadfast in their belief that god is male. They are taught that he is male because the bible says he/him all the time. I think that the bible was written by men and fit with their values of the day and age it was written in. Therefore God is Male.

I almost wonder if, had god chosen to speak to a woman, a man wouldn't have still had to have been the one to write the story and spread the word. If a woman had tried to build the following of christ where would we be today? How would things be different? Do you think the Xian faith have gotten anywhere? It's interesting to think about. Almost as interesting as wondering how things would be different if Jesus was the Daughter of God rather than the Son.

GrythusDraconis
"I'm sick of hearing that beauty is only skin-deep. That's deep enough. Who wants an adorable pancreas?" - Unknown

velvetrose
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: overlooking the bay
Insane since: Apr 2001

posted posted 03-14-2003 21:40

besides the story of Esther, which is a story of courage, there is Miriam, whose story is one of devotion.

as for the maleness of god.. i was taught when i learned to read, that the 'he' when referring to people, meant 'he' in terms of the family of man - so it included all people, male and female.

much of the world does appear to be patriarchal (sp), but from i recall of welsh mythology, that culture was matriarchal celebrating the earth and women, because life was born of both of them from the unknown darkness. then the eastern philosphies reached them, making known that men did have a part in the creation of the species and the physically stronger men moved to overturn the matriarchy into a partriarchy. anyone got more info on that? the details are a bit fuzzy for me...

[edit - daughter of god.. hehe. that reminds me of something jade mentioned - that mary existed on the same plane as god as his future mother.. anyone know where that is mentioned in the bible? or is it part of the oral? tradition she mentioned.. what and where is that written?

[This message has been edited by velvetrose (edited 03-14-2003).]

JKMabry
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: out of a sleepy funk
Insane since: Aug 2000

posted posted 03-14-2003 22:40

WS has asked a question that he made up I reckon, based on little knowledge and much generalism.

Women are not, in general, or by decree, "oppressed" in the Bible by mandate from God that I'm aware of, or even by implication of men.

The Bible is very clear on the fact that men and women are different, and were created to have different roles. That's not a real popular notion these days in almost all modern civilizations and cultures but it's really a very lovely thing (for men and women) if you take the time to understand it as it's intended and not to just take scriptures out of context or generalisms that have been thrown around on the subject by entities that are clearly biased, it's a lovely lovely relationship between men, women, and God. A very general question has been asked, I answered it in a very general way.

Back to the original intent of my post:

WS, if you have a specific question regarding the Bible and what it says about men, women, God, relationships between the 3, or 2 or whatever, let fly. Once again you've just managed to throw out a very general negative statement for discussion, maybe that was your intent? Where, in your opinion, are "women portrayed so badly in the Bible"? I'd like to know what your rather vague rationalisations are based on.

Jason

edit: typos (I left the bad sentences and grammar =)

[This message has been edited by JKMabry (edited 03-15-2003).]

GrythusDraconis
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: The Astral Plane
Insane since: Jul 2002

posted posted 03-14-2003 22:51

VR - that's rather similar to the beliefs of the pagan religions in that the "God" is born again of his own seed and only the "Godess" is eternal. Funny that Jade would believe something so... Pagan. LOL

JKmabry - I think WS was commenting on the lack of representation by women in the bible and then specific instances like Eve and the apple. There is a section in there somewhere that states that you are only entitled to reimbursment if someone kills your wife while she's pregnant. I'll have to look that up later on though. It on the pages that deal with when it's okay to kill people. Roughly on the facing page from the Ten Commandments (I think).

[EDIT]Exodus Chapter 20

I think the above link lists a few instances in which women are treated poorly or at least not fairly.

GrythusDraconis
"I'm sick of hearing that beauty is only skin-deep. That's deep enough. Who wants an adorable pancreas?" - Unknown

[This message has been edited by GrythusDraconis (edited 03-14-2003).]

mobrul
Bipolar (III) Inmate

From:
Insane since: Aug 2000

posted posted 03-14-2003 23:10

I don't have a Bible handy here (nor the brillant memory for scripture of Bugs or others) but somewhere near the beginning of 1 Timothy Paul wrote that he would not permit women to teach men or or hold authority over them. Ephesians tells women to submit to their husbands. Numbers says that men are to be responsible for the actions of their wives (implying some sort of power.)
Certainly, one could argue that Deborah, Esther, Sarah, and Mary are all examples of strong women in the Bible. Both Acts and Romans (likely others) tell of women preachers and teachers.

At the very least, one could argue a contradiction...maybe possible confusion is a better word. I can't speak for WebShaman, but I certainly think this topic is worth examining, yes?
I'd like to hear from people more knowledgable in Christian theology than myself.

One can not push aside sexism with a simple "we're different and we each have our place." It would then be just as simple (was just as simple) to say "Blacks aren't 'inferior', but we each have our own place and their place is to be our slaves."
To say 'women will not teach men', 'are subservient to men', 'can hold no authority over men', etc. goes beyond 'each has our own duties'.

I'm willing to say that some of those things are signs of the times. I am absolutely convinced that most (if not all) the dietary restrictions in the OT were health related...signs of the times. Same for sick people sitting outside the town for 7 days, burial/funeral traditions, etc. I'd bet most every law in those books were more practical in nature than 'spiritual'. I'm OK with that. That's a sign of the times. If 'religion' has provided the necessary motivations to keep my genes healthy, so be it.

But those of you (general, not pointed at anybody in particular) who take the word of the Bible as an absolute truth, there's some explanin' to do.
As I see it, you need to either:
a) provide argument that the Bible really isn't sexist
b) accept that God wants a sexist society
c) I can't think of a 'c'

GrythusDraconis
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: The Astral Plane
Insane since: Jul 2002

posted posted 03-14-2003 23:43

C) Accept the bible as stories, fables if you will, that were meant to guide people to what the fallible men of the time thought was the ideal world.

GrythusDraconis
"I'm sick of hearing that beauty is only skin-deep. That's deep enough. Who wants an adorable pancreas?" - Unknown

InSiDeR
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: Oblivion
Insane since: Sep 2001

posted posted 03-14-2003 23:58

Ah, mobrul got to it before I.

I was going to bring up the Catholic's relationship with Mother Mary. She was probably the most portrayed woman on the bible. Catholics have a "rosary" in which is made to honor Mary, and several prayers follow each bead.

Like:

Holy Mary, Mother of God
Pray for our sinners now at the hour of our death.
Amen.

And, you have to take to account, that the bible was written by several people, in many collections, so it was all their interpretation of women, not Gods.


_____________________
Prying open my third eye.

porzitsku
Obsessive-Compulsive (I) Inmate

From: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Insane since: Mar 2003

posted posted 03-15-2003 00:13

Hola, just trippin' through and saw some posts of interests. My 2 Ore worth...
Why is the Bible so hard on women? - You think so? Who's standards are you using? Look, men were the primary (if not exclusive) writers of the thing. My take is that men were careful about admitting how much under the influence of women they were, and tended to over compensate in their writings. ark ark
Actually, I also believe that men and women have natural roles in life just like they have natural likes and tendencies. That doesn't mean every man has to like NASCAR and every woman has to like herbal tea, but statistically speaking it holds true. Many people treat Paul's writing as dogma and forget that people are after all only people. Therefore different. Therefore difficult. Therefore context is important.

Is the Bible for real? - Well, yes, as a history of a stiff-necked people who had a tough time, and the idea that God is real and lives and lived among us and...(there's more but I won't bother you with it. Check out studyjesus.com if you want more than this)

Is the Bible Literal? - Depends on your def of literal. I think the events depicted in the OT are real, but historically vague. The NT seems a pretty well-documented truth-tellin' source. As for proving / disproving the miracles and all, is the glass half-full or half-empty?

Is God a Male? - God is whole, spirit, perfect. Therefore God can't be Male (or female)

Is the Bible Sexist? - According to the times, I think no. According to some today, yes. Tell you what, though, it can be taken that way by the sensitive (what some might call OVERsensitive) but such deflects or dillutes the purpose and intent of the Bible. See above for theory on how men wrote the thing.

Why was woman made? (implying it was "merely" as a helpmate for man) I think man was lonely and incomplete. Woman was made to make him whole and happy. That could only really happen if she were happy with the arrangement too, so that seems to be important. Part of the "happy" business is procreation, as most of us know...

What is Jesus was the daughter of God? What if the Church were started by women? - Being a man, I have a knee-jerk reaction to that first question. BUt I'll skip it. "Son of Man" fits better than "Daughter of Woman" so let's leave it at that. What if, schmuttif... Second - women did a lot to help start the church, like believing first, getting the word out first, taling about Him, as well as some rich women supporting traveling preachers and starting and leading churches etc.

Oops gotta go. Weekend, ya know. God bless all of y'all.

Sanzen
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Raleigh, NC
Insane since: Jan 2003

posted posted 03-15-2003 00:55

all men like NASCAR????? ... personally i detest it.

"Salting the back of a snail... My turkish prison is knowing that i fit in...."- Glassjaw

GrythusDraconis
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: The Astral Plane
Insane since: Jul 2002

posted posted 03-15-2003 02:33

Welcome and nice first post, porzitsku!

I only have one issue with what you wrote.

quote:
"Son of Man" fits better than "Daughter of Woman" so let's leave it at that.



First off it was Son of God or Daughter of God (no qualifiers, see?)

And Knee-jerk or not (preferably not) I wanted some actual thoughts on this, not a dismissal.

Great first post. Add one to the list of hopefulls.


GrythusDraconis
"I'm sick of hearing that beauty is only skin-deep. That's deep enough. Who wants an adorable pancreas?" - Unknown

Bugimus
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: New California
Insane since: Mar 2000

posted posted 03-15-2003 04:04

I think this has the potential of becoming a truly great thread...

JKMabry
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: out of a sleepy funk
Insane since: Aug 2000

posted posted 03-15-2003 08:27

GrythusDraconis:
Exodus Chapter 20 (you meant and linked 21 actually?), not to generalize, well ok, to generalize ... Exodus 21:24 is the famous "eye for an eye" verse and it sums up much of the legalistic stuff scribed in that chapter. Jesus said "but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also" in Matthew 5:38-39 in response to that attitude.
In my studies of this subject I must confess I've been focusing on the New Testament and haven't given much time at all to the Old, especially the laundry lists like you linked. I look at them, for now, on a very high level, as I dig deeper into New Testament teachings for the time being.

mobrul:
For the record, I was not attempting to push aside "sexism", surely by todays standards the Bible can be construed as sexist in places (in that it distinctly separates the sexes and calls for subjection to the male as head of the marital relationship as Christ is the head of the body of believers, his bride [Ephesians 5:22-31]).

Oppression is completely different matter and unfortunately that's going to be open to interpretation based on perspective. I would define oppression as an unjust excercise of authority and I really don't see that coming from the Bible in regards to the study I've done on the marital relationship.

I do in fact agree with your A and B assessment to some degree and choose B (according to the distinction made above).

I too look forward to seeing how this develops because frankly, I don't understand some of the Old Testament teachings, and I've often wondered about the teaching aspect of it (1 Timothy 2:12) my ownself. However, I'm very comfortable practicing the New Testament teachings regarding marital relationships and can honestly say it's nowhere near oppressive, but liberating (yes, even for the wife =) and unifying.

Jason

Wolfen
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Minnesota
Insane since: Jan 2001

posted posted 03-15-2003 10:49

I am not sure if I should mention about 'lillith'...

velvetrose
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: overlooking the bay
Insane since: Apr 2001

posted posted 03-15-2003 15:00

she's not even mentioned in the bible.. where does her story appear?

Bugimus
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: New California
Insane since: Mar 2000

posted posted 03-15-2003 17:27

Lilith appears on Cheers and later on Frasier

Lilith is the Queen of the Demons and she is described in the Kabbalah which are writings of Jewish mysticism and the occult.

briggl
Bipolar (III) Inmate

From: Here, There and Everywhere
Insane since: Sep 2000

posted posted 03-15-2003 22:44

Actually, a lot of scholars think that much of the old testament was written by women.

Ruski
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From:
Insane since: Jul 2002

posted posted 03-16-2003 02:42

woman was made to be sexed up and to reproduce...at least that is a basic point

"Biblicly" my guess is that Adam must have been humping random creatures in Eden until God got tired of it and made him a mate!

p.s. no offence to women here, I just love those beauties!
and cmon guys take it as a joke

[edit]sig[/edit]





[This message has been edited by Ruski (edited 03-16-2003).]

WebShaman
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: Happy Hunting Grounds...
Insane since: Mar 2001

posted posted 03-17-2003 11:13
quote:
WS has asked a question that he made up I reckon, based on little knowledge and much generalism.

--JKMabry



That actually hurt, JK...and since I am not in any reasonable or logical mood, after reading that, I'm refraining for awhile on replying to that.

And Ruski, could you maybe keep it 'on the ground'? Humor is good, but sometimes, it just doesn't fit...

Damn, I'm pissed off right now...time to go cool off.

Maskkkk
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Willaimsport, PA, US of A the hole in the Ozone
Insane since: Mar 2002

posted posted 03-17-2003 14:44

Sure maybe they were up until Mary, she carried God in her womb. If that's not an honor I don't know what is

Ruski
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From:
Insane since: Jul 2002

posted posted 03-17-2003 19:12

umm Shaman why are you pissed? is it personal or me?

outcydr
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: out there
Insane since: Oct 2001

posted posted 03-18-2003 02:33

I was just wondering what you mean by writs? Rights? In the legal sense?

Food for Thought: Let's take this question back to the beginning.
Satan seduced Eve; not that he couldn't have just as easily seduced Adam, but so that Adam could have someone to blame when he fell for the seduction too. Who was weaker?

I personally don't think women are protrayed in a bad light in the Bible. Just like today, without even considering the Bible, it's a matter of perspective. If you think women are inferior, you will tend to focus on things that portray them in that light; or just the opposite.
But, all in all, I guess the best answer would be , God is no respector of persons.

[This message has been edited by outcydr (edited 03-18-2003).]

WebShaman
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: Happy Hunting Grounds...
Insane since: Mar 2001

posted posted 03-18-2003 09:51

Ok...after giving the thing a rest...food for thought :

@ Ruski, no, I'm not angry at you. If I gave you that opinion, then I apologize.

I have read the Bible, quite a lot, actually. And my many discussions with Bugs have done much to expand my...knowledge of areas that i didn't much know about before (much of the new testament, actually). I really enjoyed reading the Old Testament...but not the New Testament.

And I just posed a question (after Bugs suggested doing so, so that we could discuss this). I do find it strange (as I somewhat mentioned) that Eve is singled out as opening 'pandoras box', so to speak. From this beginning, it sets a tone, that is found throughout most of the Old Testament, about women. Also, there are no writings from women in the Bible (at least, not in the Old Testament as far as I'm aware of), that are accedited. This is mainly what I wanted to discuss, of why this is so. And why were none of the Apostles of Jesus women (New Testament)? In fact, some of the Apostles actually left their families (and women) to 'join' Jesus.

I'm going to avoid directly replying to JK's...remarks, as I don't wish this to become a flame thread.

On with the thread...and please excuse my...behavior.

JKMabry
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: out of a sleepy funk
Insane since: Aug 2000

posted posted 03-19-2003 04:47

Flame thread? This means you're 'pissed' then? I would not have thought you so easy to get to

In actual fact, I was not trying to get to you, on a personal level, insultingly, at all. Just observations and questions. But I ran the question of this thread by a few trusted friends that were online when I got the notion, and they said my first reply would have stung them pretty good as well. I can't say I'm suprised, I can be a little tactless I've been told and if that's not getting me in trouble my flippant humor is. So all apologies to you WebShaman, it honestly was not my intent to insult you. If you'd like to talk about it further, my email's open and you'll find me most civil.

Jason

DL-44
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: under the bed
Insane since: Feb 2000

posted posted 03-19-2003 15:26

I'd just like to say that I've never understood actual anger over things like these...it's just silly.

While JK's comment could have rubbed someone the wrong way perhaps, it's just his opinion, and you have every opportunity to correct it.

=)

bodhi23
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Greensboro, NC USA
Insane since: Jun 2002

posted posted 03-19-2003 16:18

In addition to the Quabbalah, Lilith is discussed in the Apocryphal Texts of the Bible. Stories that weren't considered important enough to make it into the "finished" version of the Bible. These texts are considered to be historically important, but not so religiously important that they are taught to the general masses on a regular basis.

Remember that the Bible was written by men, for men, in a patriarchal society. Up until a couple of hundred years ago, women weren't even allowed to read the Bible! Christianity was born out of Judaism, which is about as patriarchal a belief system as you can get. Yes, there are some strong women represented in the Bible, but women, in both the Old and New Testament are generally represented as the root of most problems. (Delilah, Mary the Magdelene, Lot's Wife, etc...) It has less to do with what "God" has to say about women than what the men writing the Bible at the time thought about the women of their time.
Sure, you can say that the Bible is "God's Word", but it is God's Word handed down through men, and influenced by the time and the place in which they lived. The New Testament was added to and edited up through Constantine's time. Think about the history of the people who wrote the Bible, and you'll find your answer to that question.

The real concern, is why today's educated people insist on taking the Bible so literally these days. Many denominations, Catholic and Southern Baptist being only 2, take the Bible's interpretation of how women and men should act completely literally. This behavioral pattern doesn't make sense in today's society because we don't think that way anymore. Well, most of us don't at any rate.

It's important to remember that the conversation is just that, a conversation. WS asked a question he wanted an answer to, and has received a great number of different interpretations on that point. JK gave an answer to that question, though his first comment seems a little out of line for a friendly conversation. There are no stupid questions. If someone wants to know something, they have a right to receive an answer without being belittled for asking. *WS - I realize you didn't ask for defense, and I know you're quite capable of defending yourself. I just hate to see a good conversation turn into an argument!

It is common knowledge that women in the Bible have been represented as "oppressed" in many different senses of the word. But the Bible is a very vague collection of moral guidelines and patchy histories. It is WIDELY open to personal interpretation. As I said above, there are modern day sects that take those guidelines literally and as a result, modern women have been "oppressed". Whether they realize it or not. We, as people, are only just recently coming out of this way of thinking, and women are seen more and more to be taking prominent places in today's society, as well as in recent history. 2000 years of patriarchy is pretty hard to overcome, slowly but surely, we are learning how to live with each other.

(edit) *Mary Magdalene is considered to have been Jesus' only female disciple. She was present at all of the same events that the rest of them were. She did not, apparently, rate the Apostle upgrade. Whether that has anything to do with her being female, is, like all else, open to interpretation.

Bodhi - Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 03-19-2003).]

WebShaman
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: Happy Hunting Grounds...
Insane since: Mar 2001

posted posted 03-20-2003 12:42

Nice post, bodhi23...thanks.

As for anger...well, more like a bit of hurt...but hey, I've got a thick skin...it'll pass. I just thought of JKMabry a bit differently, that's all. Now that that has been corrected, all is fine.

On with the topic.

bodhi23
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Greensboro, NC USA
Insane since: Jun 2002

posted posted 03-20-2003 14:37

Thanks for the props, WS... means a lot coming from you. No really....

Being a strong woman myself, and being the daughter of not only another strong woman, but also an Episcopal minister, I have a few thoughts on the whole Woman/Bible issue...

Christianity has historically been a male dominated religion, but I find that more spirituality comes through women than most of the men I meet. I feel the most important facet of religion to be spirituality. The teachings of any given religion are merely guidelines, showing us how to live based on the core beliefs of our individual spirituality, however, it is so important to bring that spirituality into your world and your time. In order for anything to survive, it must change to meet the challenges of each new age. It says a lot about Christianity that it is still in existence. Gradually, it has changed.

Like I said, up until recently, women weren't allowed to read the Bible, let alone preach it's message. I haven't checked the Catholic church recently, but I believe they are now at least allowing women to serve as deacons in the church. They've been very slow to accept women as ministers. But I think they realized they lost a lot of their women parishoners to the Episcopal church because the Episcopalians would allow them to follow their call.

Having listened to a great many ministers in my life, I find I enjoy listening to women preach more than the men I've heard. Something about it touches me deeper. I don't consider myself to be a "Christian"; agnostic, more than anything. But I enjoy religion, and spirituality, and have spent considerable time reading up on the various ways and means people have found to express their spirituality... It's been a very interesting study. I think because the Bible's teachings are so male oriented, women preachers tend to focus more on the root emotions of Jesus' teachings, rather than literal interpretations of the parables. Could also be because I am a woman myself. I've never thought about it that deeply.

*edit - new fingers... bad spelling...

Bodhi - Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 03-20-2003).]

« BackwardsOnwards »

Show Forum Drop Down Menu