Showing posts with label feminism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label feminism. Show all posts
13 July 2014
YouTuber shout outs: Captain Andy
"I like to talk about politics and religion... especially in polite company. I draw things with crayons. I make music... though I promise I'll never ask you to vote for me in anything. I eat vegetables... "
one more, just 'cause...
27 June 2014
Everyone I love knows how to bleed with me
(c) Gloria Steinem, from: Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions. NY: NAL, 1986.
poted by Sally Kohn (sallyk@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu) at Haverford Colledge
originaly published in Ms. Magazing, 1978 /other articles by Gloria Steiman here
Reading Freud made me just as skeptical about penis envy. The power of giving birth makes "womb envy" more logical, and an organ as external and unprotected as the penis makes men very vulnerable indeed.
But listening recently to a woman describe the unexpected arrival of her menstrual period (a red stain had spread on her dress as she argued heatedly on the public stage) still made me cringe with embarrassment. That is, until she explained that, when finally informed in whispers of the obvious event, she said to the all-male audience, "and you should be proud to have a menstruating woman on your stage. It's probably the first real thing that's happened to this group in years."
Laughter. Relief. She had turned a negative into a positive. Somehow her story merged with India and Freud to make me finally understand the power of positive thinking. Whatever a "superior" group has will be used to justify its superiority, and whatever and "inferior" group has will be used to justify its plight. Black men were given poorly paid jobs because they were said to be "stronger" than white men, while all women were relegated to poorly paid jobs because they were said to be "weaker." As the little boy said when asked if he wanted to be a lawyer like his mother, "Oh no, that's women's work." Logic has nothing to do with oppression.
So what would happen if suddenly, magically, men could menstruate and women could not?
Clearly, menstruation would become an enviable, worthy, masculine event:
Men would brag about how long and how much.
Young boys would talk about it as the envied beginning of manhood. Gifts, religious ceremonies, family dinners, and stag parties would mark the day.
To prevent monthly work loss among the powerful, Congress would fund a National Institute of Dysmenorrhea. Doctors would research little about heart attacks, from which men would be hormonally protected, but everything about cramps.
Sanitary supplies would be federally funded and free. Of course, some men would still pay for the prestige of such commercial brands as Paul Newman Tampons, Muhammad Ali's Rope-a-Dope Pads, John Wayne Maxi Pads, and Joe Namath Jock Shields- "For Those Light Bachelor Days."
Statistical surveys would show that men did better in sports and won more Olympic medals during their periods.
Generals, right-wing politicians, and religious fundamentalists would cite menstruation ("men-struation") as proof that only men could serve God and country in combat ("You have to give blood to take blood"), occupy high political office ("Can women be properly fierce without a monthly cycle governed by the planet Mars?"), be priests, ministers, God Himself ("He gave this blood for our sins"), or rabbis ("Without a monthly purge of impurities, women are unclean").
Male liberals and radicals, however, would insist that women are equal, just different; and that any woman could join their ranks if only she were willing to recognize the primacy of menstrual rights ("Everything else is a single issue") or self-inflict a major wound every month ("You must give blood for the revolution").
Street guys would invent slang ("He's a three-pad man") and "give fives" on the corner with some exchenge like, "Man you lookin' good!"
"Yeah, man, I'm on the rag!"
TV shows would treat the subject openly. (Happy Days: Richie and Potsie try to convince Fonzie that he is still "The Fonz," though he has missed two periods in a row. Hill Street Blues: The whole precinct hits the same cycle.) So would newspapers. (Summer Shark Scare Threatens Menstruating Men. Judge Cites Monthlies In Pardoning Rapist.) And so would movies. (Newman and Redford in Blood Brothers!)
Men would convince women that sex was more pleasurable at "that time of the month." Lesbians would be said to fear blood and therefore life itself, though all they needed was a good menstruating man.
Medical schools would limit women's entry ("they might faint at the sight of blood").
Of course, intellectuals would offer the most moral and logical arguements. Without the biological gift for measuring the cycles of the moon and planets, how could a woman master any discipline that demanded a sense of time, space, mathematics-- or the ability to measure anything at all? In philosophy and religion, how could women compensate for being disconnected from the rhythm of the universe? Or for their lack of symbolic death and resurrection every month?
Menopause would be celebrated as a positive event, the symbol that men had accumulated enough years of cyclical wisdom to need no more.
Liberal males in every field would try to be kind. The fact that "these people" have no gift for measuring life, the liberals would explain, should be punishment enough.
And how would women be trained to react? One can imagine right-wing women agreeing to all these arguements with a staunch and smiling masochism. ("The ERA would force housewives to wound themselves every month": Phyllis Schlafly)
In short, we would discover, as we should already, that logic is in the eye of the logician. (For instance, here's an idea for theorists and logicians: if women are supposed to be less rational and more emotional at the beginning of our menstrual cycle when the female hormone is at its lowest level, then why isn't it logical to say that, in those few days, women behave the most like the way men behave all month long? I leave further improvisation up to you.)
The truth is that, if men could menstruate, the power justifications would go on and on.
If we let them.
Dominique Christina - "The Period Poem"
F-bomb warning
Dominique Christina on Facebook
9 March 2013
I want my sufferage: International Women's Day
(apologies, I wasn't able to get this up yesterday)
"In the 19th century, female property holders could demand municipal
voting rights on the principle of "no taxation without representation."
Propertied women in Québec voted unchallenged between 1809 and 1849,
when the word "male" was inserted into Québec's franchise act. What
Québec women lost, Ontario women soon gained: from 1850, women with
property, married or single, could vote for school trustees. By 1900
municipal voting privileges for propertied women were general throughout
Canada. But most 19th-century Canadians, women as well as men, believed
that the sexes had been assigned to "separate spheres" by natural and
divine laws that overrode mere man-made laws, and this stood squarely in
the way of achieving votes for all women as a democratic right.
At
the provincial level, public debate in Ontario began among members of
the Toronto Women's Literary Club, a screen for suffrage activities
created 1876 by Dr Emily Howard STOWE, Canada's first woman doctor. She and her daughter, Dr Augusta STOWE-GULLEN,
spearheaded Ontario's suffrage campaign for 40 years. In 1883 the club
became the Toronto Women's Suffrage Association, then in 1889 the
Dominion Women's Enfranchisement Association - a national group in name
only.
Despite numerous petitions and bills, Ontario's lawmakers,
confident that they had public opinion behind them, repeatedly blocked
changes. Suffrage groups were thus forced to undertake long years of
public education. Valuable support came in the 1890s from the WOMAN'S CHRISTIAN TEMPERANCE UNION, whose leaders saw votes for women as necessary in achieving PROHIBITION. In 1910, the respected and influential NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WOMEN spoke out for suffrage... "
read the entire entry at: Canadian Encyclopedia
see also: History of Women's Sufferage, Marionopolis Collge
~~~~~
Bad Romance: Women's Suffrage is a parody music video paying homage to
Alice Paul and the generations of brave women who joined together in the fight to pass the
19th Amendment, giving American women the right to vote in 1920.
27 August 2012
Russia and the new Dark Age
100 year ban on Gay Pride events:
"Moscow is not Sodom... I will not allow perverts to bring the wrath of God onto our city… I want our children to live in a country where a sin that so awfully distorts human nature is not preached in schools.”
Dmitry Tsarionov, Orthodox Christian anti-gay protester
PinkNews
“It’s a matter of grave concern that Moscow’s municipal government has again marginalised the city’s gay community... It’s another sign of the dire situation for Russia’s 8.5 million lesbian, gay and bisexual people, whose human rights are routinely abused by the government and police...”
Stonewall International Officer Jasmine O’Connor
"I've Only Just Begun" Facebook page
Pussy Riot:
"... The next day three members of Pussy Riot would be convicted of felony hooliganism and sentenced to two years in penal colonies—for a protest they staged inside Moscow’s Cathedral of Christ the Savior on Feb. 21. The cathedral had been virtually empty during the morning hours, and the protest lasted all of 40 seconds before the women were removed by security. But church staff members testified during the trial that they were deeply traumatized by observing the young women in brightly colored dresses and balaclavas lip-sync to a recording of what Pussy Riot calls its punk prayer: “Mother of God, cast Putin out... ”
Masha Gessen , The Daily Beast
" ...Political observers say the decision to imprison the girls was the result of a deal struck between Putin and the church, without much involvement by the Kremlin's administration. And for Putin, of course, there is not much political cost in punishing critics who are already despised by a large part of the population. At the beginning of the trial, nearly half those polled said a punishment of two to seven years in prison was appropriate. .. "
Anna Nemtsova, The Daily Beast
fixed: October 14, 2012
from: Amnesty International
"Last Friday, Russian authorities sentenced Maria Alekhina, Ekaterina Samutsevich, and Nadezhda Tolonnikova to two years in a penal colony for exercising their right to Freedom of Expression.
Authorities charged the women with hooliganism on grounds of "hatred, planned and committed by a group of people." Expert legal opinions accepted that although the action may have been offensive to some, there was no evidence that the women had aimed at inciting hatred.
Say what you will about Pussy Riot: this may not be your kind of music. Some people find their shows offensive. But it doesn't change the facts: Since March, these young women have been in jail and kept from their families, including small children, and they now face two years imprisonment - all because of a peaceful protest song that lasted less than a minute. Even if the performance was calculated to shock and cause offense, the activists left the Cathedral when requested and caused no damage.
The European Court of Human Rights states that freedom of expression applies not only to inoffensive ideas, but "also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population".
Amnesty International now considers Pussy Riot to be Prisoners of Conscience, and we won't give up on them. Click here now to demand their immediate release."
from: AVAAZ
"Facing 2 years in jail for singing a song criticizing President Putin in a church, a member of Pussy Riot gestured to the court and said in her show-trial's closing statements, "Despite the fact that we are physically here, we are freer than everyone sitting across from us ... We can say anything we want..."
Russia is steadily slipping into the grip of a new autocracy -- clamping down on public protest, allegedly rigging elections, intimidating media, banning gay rights parades for 100 years, and even beating critics like chess master Garry Kasparov...
Last week’s trial is about far more than three women and their 40-second ‘punk prayer’. When tens of thousands flooded the streets to protest rigged elections, the government threw organisers into jail for weeks. And in June Parliament effectively outlawed dissent by raising the fine for unsanctioned protest by an astounding 150-fold, roughly the average Russian’s salary for a whole year.
Pussy Riot may be the most famous Russian dissidents right now, but their sentence is not the grossest injustice of Putin’s war on dissent. In 2009, anti-corruption lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who uncovered a massive tax fraud at the heart of Russia’s power dealers, died in jail -- without a trial, on shaky charges, and with medical attention repeatedly denied. 60 of Russia’s elite have been under scrutiny for the case and its cover-up, and the sanctions the European Parliament is proposing are on this inner circle.
International attention to Russia’s crackdown is cresting right now, and the ‘Magnitsky sanctions’ are the best way to put the heat on Putin and help create breathing room for the suffocating democracy movement.
The European Parliament is calling for an assets freeze and travel ban on Putin’s powerful inner circle who are accused of multiple crimes. (The AVAAZ) community is spread across every corner of the world -- if we can push the Europeans to act, it will not only hit Putin's circle hard, as many bank and have homes in Europe, but also counter his anti-Western propaganda, showing him that the whole world is willing to stand up for a free Russia.
What happens in Russia matters to us all. Russia has blocked international coordination on Syria and other urgent global issues, and a Russian autocracy threatens the world we all want, wherever we are. The Russian people face a serious challenge, but we know that people-powered movements are the best cure for corruption and iron-fisted governments -- and that international solidarity can help keep the flame of these movements alive. Let’s join together now to show Putin that the world will hold him to account and push for change until Russia is set free.
Click ...to support the sanctions ... and give Europe's leaders a global public mandate to adopt the sanctions. "
sources:
Pink News
Milkboys Blog
The Daily Beast
No Country For Women
Ms. Magazine
Business Insider
update (october 2012): One band member freed
"Moscow is not Sodom... I will not allow perverts to bring the wrath of God onto our city… I want our children to live in a country where a sin that so awfully distorts human nature is not preached in schools.”
Dmitry Tsarionov, Orthodox Christian anti-gay protester
PinkNews
“It’s a matter of grave concern that Moscow’s municipal government has again marginalised the city’s gay community... It’s another sign of the dire situation for Russia’s 8.5 million lesbian, gay and bisexual people, whose human rights are routinely abused by the government and police...”
Stonewall International Officer Jasmine O’Connor
"I've Only Just Begun" Facebook page
Pussy Riot:
"... The next day three members of Pussy Riot would be convicted of felony hooliganism and sentenced to two years in penal colonies—for a protest they staged inside Moscow’s Cathedral of Christ the Savior on Feb. 21. The cathedral had been virtually empty during the morning hours, and the protest lasted all of 40 seconds before the women were removed by security. But church staff members testified during the trial that they were deeply traumatized by observing the young women in brightly colored dresses and balaclavas lip-sync to a recording of what Pussy Riot calls its punk prayer: “Mother of God, cast Putin out... ”
Masha Gessen , The Daily Beast
" ...Political observers say the decision to imprison the girls was the result of a deal struck between Putin and the church, without much involvement by the Kremlin's administration. And for Putin, of course, there is not much political cost in punishing critics who are already despised by a large part of the population. At the beginning of the trial, nearly half those polled said a punishment of two to seven years in prison was appropriate. .. "
Anna Nemtsova, The Daily Beast
"I am not afraid
of you. I am not afraid of you and I am not afraid of the thinly
veneered deceit of your verdict at this 'so-called' trial. My truth
lives with me.
I believe that honesty, free-speaking and the thirst for
truth will make us all a
little freer. We will see this come to pass."
Marina Alyokhina, from closing statement at the Pussy Riot "hooliganism" trial.
the petitions:
from: Amnesty International
"Last Friday, Russian authorities sentenced Maria Alekhina, Ekaterina Samutsevich, and Nadezhda Tolonnikova to two years in a penal colony for exercising their right to Freedom of Expression.
Authorities charged the women with hooliganism on grounds of "hatred, planned and committed by a group of people." Expert legal opinions accepted that although the action may have been offensive to some, there was no evidence that the women had aimed at inciting hatred.
Say what you will about Pussy Riot: this may not be your kind of music. Some people find their shows offensive. But it doesn't change the facts: Since March, these young women have been in jail and kept from their families, including small children, and they now face two years imprisonment - all because of a peaceful protest song that lasted less than a minute. Even if the performance was calculated to shock and cause offense, the activists left the Cathedral when requested and caused no damage.
The European Court of Human Rights states that freedom of expression applies not only to inoffensive ideas, but "also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population".
Amnesty International now considers Pussy Riot to be Prisoners of Conscience, and we won't give up on them. Click here now to demand their immediate release."
"Facing 2 years in jail for singing a song criticizing President Putin in a church, a member of Pussy Riot gestured to the court and said in her show-trial's closing statements, "Despite the fact that we are physically here, we are freer than everyone sitting across from us ... We can say anything we want..."
Russia is steadily slipping into the grip of a new autocracy -- clamping down on public protest, allegedly rigging elections, intimidating media, banning gay rights parades for 100 years, and even beating critics like chess master Garry Kasparov...
Last week’s trial is about far more than three women and their 40-second ‘punk prayer’. When tens of thousands flooded the streets to protest rigged elections, the government threw organisers into jail for weeks. And in June Parliament effectively outlawed dissent by raising the fine for unsanctioned protest by an astounding 150-fold, roughly the average Russian’s salary for a whole year.
Pussy Riot may be the most famous Russian dissidents right now, but their sentence is not the grossest injustice of Putin’s war on dissent. In 2009, anti-corruption lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who uncovered a massive tax fraud at the heart of Russia’s power dealers, died in jail -- without a trial, on shaky charges, and with medical attention repeatedly denied. 60 of Russia’s elite have been under scrutiny for the case and its cover-up, and the sanctions the European Parliament is proposing are on this inner circle.
International attention to Russia’s crackdown is cresting right now, and the ‘Magnitsky sanctions’ are the best way to put the heat on Putin and help create breathing room for the suffocating democracy movement.
The European Parliament is calling for an assets freeze and travel ban on Putin’s powerful inner circle who are accused of multiple crimes. (The AVAAZ) community is spread across every corner of the world -- if we can push the Europeans to act, it will not only hit Putin's circle hard, as many bank and have homes in Europe, but also counter his anti-Western propaganda, showing him that the whole world is willing to stand up for a free Russia.
What happens in Russia matters to us all. Russia has blocked international coordination on Syria and other urgent global issues, and a Russian autocracy threatens the world we all want, wherever we are. The Russian people face a serious challenge, but we know that people-powered movements are the best cure for corruption and iron-fisted governments -- and that international solidarity can help keep the flame of these movements alive. Let’s join together now to show Putin that the world will hold him to account and push for change until Russia is set free.
Click ...to support the sanctions ... and give Europe's leaders a global public mandate to adopt the sanctions. "
sources:
Pink News
Milkboys Blog
The Daily Beast
No Country For Women
Ms. Magazine
Business Insider
update (october 2012): One band member freed
7 June 2012
The Guys Guide to Feminism
reblogged from: No Country for Women; originally posted April 17, 2012 by taslima
The guy’s guide to feminism
...I finally found the book. A small green book. A guide. A to Z guide to all things feminist. It is called "The Guy’s Guide to Feminism"
I just love the book.
If you do not like to read books on feminism by women, fine. Then read this one, written by two guys, Michael Kaufman and Michael Kimmel. It’s funny. Remarkable. Straight to the point explanation how and why feminism improves men’s life.
There are fascinating pieces –
”Do you believe that women should have the right to:
- Vote?
- Go to college?
- Drive a car?
- Open bank accounts in their own names?
- Enjoy sex?
- Work in whatever occupation they might choose, and get paid the same as men when they do the same work?
Then you better lie down. . . . You’ve probably caught feminism.
The feminist contagion has spread far and wide. It infects both women and men. Most people in North America, Europe and many parts of the rest of the world have caught it. The terrible truth is that, nowadays, most of us support these rights and actually see them as basic rights of individuals in a democracy.”
full article here
full article here
11 March 2012
incremental departure: leaving faith behind
Searching for the Baby in the Bathwater
(found on: Love, Joy, Feminism, February 23, 2012, by Libby Ann: Reblogged with permission of the author)
(This is a slightly edited repost of a post I wrote when I
first started blogging last summer. I’m reposting it for new readers.
This post explains how I moved from evangelical Christianity to atheism
over a process that took some years to complete. . here)
Everyone who leaves the Quiverfull movement, Christian Patriarchy, or evangelical or fundamentalism in general has a long journey in front of them. They have to sort through everything they have always believed and determine what to throw out and what to keep, what still makes sense and what does not. This can be a long and difficult process, and can even take years.
I had been taught all my life to take the Bible literally, to believe that God created the world in six days, that Abraham and Moses really existed and did and said what the Bible records, that every word of the Gospels was true as written, and that Paul really did tell women to submit to their husbands and not work outside of the home. The Bible, I was taught, was infallible, without error of any sort, and was my guide for life. But when I found in college that my parents’ views on evolution were wrong, and that the Biblical account of creation could not possibly be literally true, I had a problem. What was I to believe?
This was actually the point where I first questioned my beliefs about patriarchy. I had wholeheartedly endorsed patriarchy up until this point, but if my dad was wrong about young earth creationism and the literal truth of the Bible – and he made this issue the very foundation of his faith and taught it to us with a passion rivalled only by his very belief in God – I realized that something was seriously out of place. Put simply, my father was wrong. And if he was wrong about this, what else was he wrong about? And how could I submit to him and make his beliefs mine if I knew he was wrong? And with that, I let go of Christian Patriarchy.
But at this point, I had bigger problems to worry about. I had been taught I that had to take the Bible literally but now I simply could not do that. In addition, when I delved further, asking questions I had never thought to ask before, I realized that, taken literally, the Bible was wrong both factually and ethically.
First of all, not only is the Bible wrong about how the world came into being, it is also wrong in numerous particulars, such as how many Israelites left Egypt (the Bible says there were 600,000 men of fighting age, which would mean about 2,000,000 people total, but at the time there were only 6,000,000 people in all of Egypt and only about 50,000 people in Canaan) and the correct dates for the existence of the various Canaanite tribes. In addition, the four Gospels contradict each other mercilessly and contain historical inaccuracies (how many donkey’s did Jesus ride on Palm Sunday? it depends on which gospel you read. similarly, therewas no empire-wide census in the days of Augustus). Sure, I had been taught to explain these things away, but I suddenly realized that those explanations made no sense when I looked at the problems honestly, and not simply out of a desire to justify my faith.
Second, I began to find that the Bible had ethical problems. God commands the Israelites to commit genocide, killing thousands of men, women, and children and wiping out entire nations. The law God gave to Moses treats women as property and even instructs fathers on how to sell their daughters into slavery. The New Testament was not immune to this either; God strikes Ananias and Sapphira dead for the simple act of lying. And this is a good, perfect, loving God? Something was seriously wrong here. And then, of course, there is the issue of sending people around the world whose only transgression is not ever hearing about Jesus to eternal torment in hell. I suddenly could not fathom how a loving God could do that.
Now that I saw the Bible as riddled with errors and filled with genocide and misogyny, I could no longer believe it was infallible in any literal sense. How was I to understand it? I had a problem on my hands. But of course, I wasn’t about to throw out the baby with the bathwater. I couldn’t very well reject Christianity – it was the core of my existence. So I set out to sift through the bathwater and find the baby. And in this process, I did what many recovering fundamentalists have done: I turned to Catholicism.
The Catholic Church admits that there are errors in the Bible, which it sees as a very human book that simply contains kernels of greater truths rather than literal truth. The Old Testament Law and the genocides were merely a tribal society’s way of understanding God, rather than being God’s actual perfect commands. This was an understanding of the Bible that I could accept, and, somehow, it made the Bible more beautiful, more rich and complex, than before. In addition, the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus came to die for all of humankind, whether they had heard of him or not. Anyone who lives life with the right heart attitude will be saved through Jesus, whether they hear of him or not. This made so much more sense. I mean, if I were Jesus, I’d die to save everyone, not just the few who might hear and believe.
And on top of that, the Catholic Church offered beauty, richness, tradition, history, and belonging. I studied the early church and found that even the earliest Christians practiced infant baptism and believed in transubstantiation. There was something beautiful about the sacraments and the ritual and the history. It fulfilled my heart’s desires. The saints became my cheerleaders and Mary my surrogate mother. I had new friends who accepted me for what I was, and did not judge me. There was comfort and contentment there. There was acceptance, and I loved it.
But once I had begun to think the questions kept coming. Why did the church condemn birth control? Why was masturbation wrong? Why did priests have to be celibate? Just believe, the Catholic Church said. Just accept. We know what is best. It became all too familiar. The beauty and richness was still there, but the hierarchy began to feel stifling. When I took issue with certain things in the church, super-Catholics told me I wasn’t being a good Catholic. Just believe. And I couldn’t do that.
At the same time, I suddenly found that I had other even more troubling questions. Why couldn’t God just forgive people, why did he have to have his son murdered in order to be able to do so? This made no sense. When someone hurt me, I didn’t have to have something murdered in order to forgive them.
It suddenly seemed to me that Christianity was built on the foundation of actual literal human sacrifice, and I felt repelled. And besides that, how does God have a son who can come to earth and die, and yet he and this son are one being, together with the Holy Spirit? Let’s face it, the Trinity makes no sense. How do theologians defend it? “Human minds cannot comprehend the mystery of it,” they say. “Just believe.” Sorry, can’t do that, I stopped doing that a while back and I won’t do it again. If the Trinity makes no sense, it makes no sense. You can’t just make it so.
With a very human Bible and Christian doctrine that didn’t even make sense anymore, I had a problem. I began to wonder if there actually was a baby in the bathwater at all.
One thing I still held onto as proof of Christianity was my relationship with Jesus. He and I had been best friends since I was a little girl, and he was always there for me. I talked to him constantly, depended on him, loved him. He was so real to me – Christianity couldn’t possibly be wrong, could it? And then I started to realize something. Christians have set it up so that God can never fail them. Your child survives cancer? Praise God! He healed your child! Your child dies of cancer? It was God’s will, and he’s teaching you things through it.
In practice, whether God exists or not is completely irrelevant. Christians don’t get sick less, they don’t have greater financial success, and studies have shown that prayer does not actually help. And as I pondered it, I realized that there was nothing about my relationship with Jesus that could not be pure imagination. In fact, that’s what it was: Jesus was my imaginary friend. And with that, I let go.
It took me almost five years from start to finish, but in the end I concluded that there was no baby in the bathwater after all. You can’t force yourself to believe something you simply don’t believe anymore, and my faith died a quiet and peaceful death. I realize that for many Christianity can embody some excellent impulses – love, service to others, charity – but no matter what people make of it, it no longer appears to me to be divine in any sense. I can appreciate it for its history, beauty, and tradition, but I no longer believe it.
I have walked beyond the borders of religion and found that the world is still a beautiful place, filled with wonder, love, and joy. I have finally found lasting contentment and answers to the questions that before had never stopped pestering me. My journey has led me to a place that has, for me, brought freedom in mind, body, and soul. Life makes so much more sense to me now, everything all fits into place, and because I now believe I have only one life to live, I am living it to its fullest with no regrets.
Love, Joy, Feminism
Freethought Blogs.com
Everyone who leaves the Quiverfull movement, Christian Patriarchy, or evangelical or fundamentalism in general has a long journey in front of them. They have to sort through everything they have always believed and determine what to throw out and what to keep, what still makes sense and what does not. This can be a long and difficult process, and can even take years.
I had been taught all my life to take the Bible literally, to believe that God created the world in six days, that Abraham and Moses really existed and did and said what the Bible records, that every word of the Gospels was true as written, and that Paul really did tell women to submit to their husbands and not work outside of the home. The Bible, I was taught, was infallible, without error of any sort, and was my guide for life. But when I found in college that my parents’ views on evolution were wrong, and that the Biblical account of creation could not possibly be literally true, I had a problem. What was I to believe?
This was actually the point where I first questioned my beliefs about patriarchy. I had wholeheartedly endorsed patriarchy up until this point, but if my dad was wrong about young earth creationism and the literal truth of the Bible – and he made this issue the very foundation of his faith and taught it to us with a passion rivalled only by his very belief in God – I realized that something was seriously out of place. Put simply, my father was wrong. And if he was wrong about this, what else was he wrong about? And how could I submit to him and make his beliefs mine if I knew he was wrong? And with that, I let go of Christian Patriarchy.
But at this point, I had bigger problems to worry about. I had been taught I that had to take the Bible literally but now I simply could not do that. In addition, when I delved further, asking questions I had never thought to ask before, I realized that, taken literally, the Bible was wrong both factually and ethically.
First of all, not only is the Bible wrong about how the world came into being, it is also wrong in numerous particulars, such as how many Israelites left Egypt (the Bible says there were 600,000 men of fighting age, which would mean about 2,000,000 people total, but at the time there were only 6,000,000 people in all of Egypt and only about 50,000 people in Canaan) and the correct dates for the existence of the various Canaanite tribes. In addition, the four Gospels contradict each other mercilessly and contain historical inaccuracies (how many donkey’s did Jesus ride on Palm Sunday? it depends on which gospel you read. similarly, therewas no empire-wide census in the days of Augustus). Sure, I had been taught to explain these things away, but I suddenly realized that those explanations made no sense when I looked at the problems honestly, and not simply out of a desire to justify my faith.
Second, I began to find that the Bible had ethical problems. God commands the Israelites to commit genocide, killing thousands of men, women, and children and wiping out entire nations. The law God gave to Moses treats women as property and even instructs fathers on how to sell their daughters into slavery. The New Testament was not immune to this either; God strikes Ananias and Sapphira dead for the simple act of lying. And this is a good, perfect, loving God? Something was seriously wrong here. And then, of course, there is the issue of sending people around the world whose only transgression is not ever hearing about Jesus to eternal torment in hell. I suddenly could not fathom how a loving God could do that.
Now that I saw the Bible as riddled with errors and filled with genocide and misogyny, I could no longer believe it was infallible in any literal sense. How was I to understand it? I had a problem on my hands. But of course, I wasn’t about to throw out the baby with the bathwater. I couldn’t very well reject Christianity – it was the core of my existence. So I set out to sift through the bathwater and find the baby. And in this process, I did what many recovering fundamentalists have done: I turned to Catholicism.
The Catholic Church admits that there are errors in the Bible, which it sees as a very human book that simply contains kernels of greater truths rather than literal truth. The Old Testament Law and the genocides were merely a tribal society’s way of understanding God, rather than being God’s actual perfect commands. This was an understanding of the Bible that I could accept, and, somehow, it made the Bible more beautiful, more rich and complex, than before. In addition, the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus came to die for all of humankind, whether they had heard of him or not. Anyone who lives life with the right heart attitude will be saved through Jesus, whether they hear of him or not. This made so much more sense. I mean, if I were Jesus, I’d die to save everyone, not just the few who might hear and believe.
And on top of that, the Catholic Church offered beauty, richness, tradition, history, and belonging. I studied the early church and found that even the earliest Christians practiced infant baptism and believed in transubstantiation. There was something beautiful about the sacraments and the ritual and the history. It fulfilled my heart’s desires. The saints became my cheerleaders and Mary my surrogate mother. I had new friends who accepted me for what I was, and did not judge me. There was comfort and contentment there. There was acceptance, and I loved it.
But once I had begun to think the questions kept coming. Why did the church condemn birth control? Why was masturbation wrong? Why did priests have to be celibate? Just believe, the Catholic Church said. Just accept. We know what is best. It became all too familiar. The beauty and richness was still there, but the hierarchy began to feel stifling. When I took issue with certain things in the church, super-Catholics told me I wasn’t being a good Catholic. Just believe. And I couldn’t do that.
At the same time, I suddenly found that I had other even more troubling questions. Why couldn’t God just forgive people, why did he have to have his son murdered in order to be able to do so? This made no sense. When someone hurt me, I didn’t have to have something murdered in order to forgive them.
It suddenly seemed to me that Christianity was built on the foundation of actual literal human sacrifice, and I felt repelled. And besides that, how does God have a son who can come to earth and die, and yet he and this son are one being, together with the Holy Spirit? Let’s face it, the Trinity makes no sense. How do theologians defend it? “Human minds cannot comprehend the mystery of it,” they say. “Just believe.” Sorry, can’t do that, I stopped doing that a while back and I won’t do it again. If the Trinity makes no sense, it makes no sense. You can’t just make it so.
With a very human Bible and Christian doctrine that didn’t even make sense anymore, I had a problem. I began to wonder if there actually was a baby in the bathwater at all.
One thing I still held onto as proof of Christianity was my relationship with Jesus. He and I had been best friends since I was a little girl, and he was always there for me. I talked to him constantly, depended on him, loved him. He was so real to me – Christianity couldn’t possibly be wrong, could it? And then I started to realize something. Christians have set it up so that God can never fail them. Your child survives cancer? Praise God! He healed your child! Your child dies of cancer? It was God’s will, and he’s teaching you things through it.
In practice, whether God exists or not is completely irrelevant. Christians don’t get sick less, they don’t have greater financial success, and studies have shown that prayer does not actually help. And as I pondered it, I realized that there was nothing about my relationship with Jesus that could not be pure imagination. In fact, that’s what it was: Jesus was my imaginary friend. And with that, I let go.
It took me almost five years from start to finish, but in the end I concluded that there was no baby in the bathwater after all. You can’t force yourself to believe something you simply don’t believe anymore, and my faith died a quiet and peaceful death. I realize that for many Christianity can embody some excellent impulses – love, service to others, charity – but no matter what people make of it, it no longer appears to me to be divine in any sense. I can appreciate it for its history, beauty, and tradition, but I no longer believe it.
I have walked beyond the borders of religion and found that the world is still a beautiful place, filled with wonder, love, and joy. I have finally found lasting contentment and answers to the questions that before had never stopped pestering me. My journey has led me to a place that has, for me, brought freedom in mind, body, and soul. Life makes so much more sense to me now, everything all fits into place, and because I now believe I have only one life to live, I am living it to its fullest with no regrets.
Love, Joy, Feminism
Freethought Blogs.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)