Unbelievable.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Lucca's 99 problems
As an African American, and as a woman I have the ability to observe parallels in the isms sexism and racism, and find concerning hypocrisy and double standards.
Simply ask yourself this question, when has there ever been an African American man who raised concerns about the use of the word nigger in a song, tv show, advertisement etc and someone refuted the claim for racism based on the mans appearance, background, history etc. Every black man can scream and moan about racist comments and NO ONE asks - well is he a good representative of African Americans. No one does that because it is irrelevant. If you murder someone, and I say it is wrong it doesn't become any less or more wrong that you murdered someone if I also have. It only means that possibly we are both murderers, the question is whether or not murder is wrong. When Rodney King was beaten for his race, no one examined whether or not he was an upstanding AfAm man who represented his race well, they simply and correctly identified the wrong - racism and addressed it.
I encourage us to identify the wrong and address it. Equally irrelevant to the question as to whether or not Lucca and Adam were inappropriate in choosing this song is whether anyone said anything to Jay before for it. As I said, if Jayz had murdered someone and no one said anything, and then Lucca murdered someone in the same way we wouldn't say - well Jay didn't hear about it so why criticize Lucca.
So again, the question is simply is it appropriate or inappropriate to spew out the words "If you're having girl problems I feel bad for you son, I got 99 problems but a b*** ain't one".
That is the question. Not whether or not someone else said it first, not whether or not we can handle a woman choosing to be sexually provocative (which is NOT degrading to women - sexuality is NORMAL), now what the person who said something about it was wearing is it or is it not wrong.
The question of wrong and right then becomes more practical. So what is wrong? That is so subjective. I think it is a better question - does it harm anyone? That is even more practical and an even more useful discussion to have. And then, if it does harm anyone, to what extent, who does it harm, why does it do so, and what responsibility did either Adam or Lucca have in choosing to harm.
Since women are so systematically discriminated against, many men and a lot of women are so desensitized to misogyny that they don't recognize it or understand the harm. It has become "normal" . It has become so "normal" to have someone stand on a stage and call women derogatory names that we actually attack the sane person who points out the basic obvious fact = calling women as a group and expletive - is degrading. Look up the definition of degrade and that is the definition.
Now, because it is so hard for us to even recognize being insulted because it is so normal I will use an analogy to this using race instead since in this society we have come to appreciate that in popular culture derogatory racial slurs are still in the public eye frowned upon (despite systematic racism still thriving).
Only when races are insulted to people actually see basic principles that are often ignored when it comes to women.
So if a white artist sang "If you're having darkie problems I feel bad for you white, I got 99 problems but a ****** ain't one"; all of America would have banned the voice. It would have been pulled from the air. No sponsors would endorse it and NO ONE would have said ANYTHING to any black person who made a comment about it besides "right on" "I support you".
Whenever you are faced with these questions - is it ok to sensationalize and popularize derogatory slurs against women, just ask yourself - if this were about race - what would I say. And likely you will see through the bull shit and see the truth.
YES - it matters that you say b**** 1 million times on TV and sing it in songs and use slurs that are derogatory against women. YES - it does harm people. Read. Read the science and literature that tells you what you already know - it impacts the self esteem and self worth of individuals when the group that they belong to is degraded in society.
READ about the way in which all genocides begin with degrading a race of people to subhuman by the use of WORDS and LANGUAGE in order to enact societal wide harm against them.
READ about the struggles that many races have fought for to make sure derogatory racial slurs be removed for popular culture - most mainstream tv shows, movies, and songs. Name me a popular song where racial slurs are used by whites against minorities in truly derogatory ways repeatedly. If minority men are so adamant about making sure that they are not degrading in music by boycotting and shutting down anyone who uses a racial slur in the public eye, why don't those same people see how women would be just as concerned about getting rid of derogatory gender based slurs used in popular culture?
Shout out to Christina for making that statement. And props to her for wearing whatever she wants. You dehumanize someone when you make them one dimensional, women can be sexy, provocative - does NOT mean she is less than a woman, doe NOT mean she is degrading women because she wears sexy clothing. No ONE said anything about Prince and MJ grabbing crotches etc. Sexuality is NORMAL part of human function. How the hell do you think we all got here? You can't put women in a box - only women who dress a certain way have the right to be respected.
Just like a gansta rapper who says nigger all day long, and is a disgrace to his race would be supported if he claimed racism when a news anchor uses the word nigger - NO ONE woman should be accosted by her peers for pointing out basic truth that calling women as a group a derogatory slur in national television is wrong DOES have a negative impact on women and men and IS part of why women have low self esteem, are victims of violence and more human rights offenses across the globe than have been committed by all of the racial atrocities added together. More women die from gender discrimination than ALL of the wars on the planet EVER.
And of course racial slurs and gender based slurs are only as good as they are powerful right? If there is no power dynamic then nigger is just a word, b**** is just a word. But in a society where people were beaten and killed to the sound of white yelling nigger, and in a society where women are gang raped to the sound of men yelling b**** and whore, these words are powerful as words, but also in action. They are part of HOW people enact violence against others. Once you dehumanize a person ANYTHING is possible. Racial slurs and gender based slurs and homophobic slurs are the first step in making it easier to discriminate against, and initiate violence against these groups.
I encourage you to READ. Know your history as a woman. Know the history of sexism, the continued struggle not just here but overseas. You all know that blacks had to fight to overturn Jim Crow laws to vote in the 60s, but did you know that women didn't get the right to vote until after black men did? You all know about racial discrimination in home ownership, but did you know that BY LAW women were not allowed IN THIS COUNTRY to own property? Did you know that marriage used to be a contract providing OWNERSHIP of a woman to a man. Only until recently have women not been PROPERTY! And in many places in the world they are still treated as cattle. 1 in 4 women WILL BE raped in this country. The most common cause of death among young african american women is murder by an african american male. WAKE UP! There is a HUGE struggle. And YES just as blacks felt that the use of derogatory terms was an affront that struggle WOMEN need to wake up and realize the same.
And afford yourself the same right to live in an environment that respects your gender as well as your race. Protect your right to tune into a show that does not spew out racial slurs AND holds the same standard for gender based slurs.
Finally, UNDERSTAND what black men and Hispanic men and gay men have known and have fought for centuries - it DOES impact your group as a whole to have derogatory slurs spat off in songs, social media, tv shows, and movies. They march and stand up and scream and kick about ANY racial slur even the slightest insinuation of a racial slur. But when a woman says - hey and also - I don't want gender based slurs spewed everywhere - the entire society chokes the breath out of her with abuse - criticism and ridiculousness. Appreciate and think about this. The misogyny of women is so entrenched and ingrained in you that you can't see the basic issue with the word b****, no this society embraces the one who says it and chastises the woman who raises up against being called it. THINK. THINK. THINK.
Read Half the Sky as a starter
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Why Do They Hate Us?
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/23/why_do_they_hate_us
Check out this article. This is an essential read for those who haven't yet grasped the extent of the problem of misogyny in the Arab world, and in general. Due to the the deeply engrained idea that women are less than human, I think it makes many people numb to the barbaric treatment that women are subjected to around the world. Although something as heinous as cutting off a persons genitals should create outrage, often among the masses it is brushed off as "cultural". The systematic hatred or murdering of human beings because of immutable differences or race or religious belief almost always is considered civil war, or genocide -- EXCEPT -- if the victims are women. Then it's cultural?
I remember a scene in the movie A Time to Kill where a black girl is raped by a group of white men in the segregated south, and in the courtroom in order to evoke any sympathy from the jury, the lawyer has to describe the violent acts committed against the girl and ask the jury to imagine that she was white.
The same concept applies here. In the segregated Jim Crow south, many whites did not consider blacks human and so were insensitive to crimes committed against them.
People only react to and fight for the rights of those who they consider "human" as well.
The reason why someone can tell you there is a country where 1/2 the population is made to subjugate themselves to the level of slaves and sometimes animals, and there can be no reaction is only when you see that person as less than a person.
If I told you they were cutting the genitals off of dogs en mass there may be some groups who had more of a reaction.
But when you hear about the atrocities committed against women, take a moment and imagine that the group is a racial minority and the atrocities are committed by a racial/ethnic majority group.
If I told you that in a certain country, white were cutting off the genitals of all blacks to make them "easier to control sexually" I bet many folks would write their congressperson right now asking what are we doing about this.
Because these atrocities are happening to "people". But if men are doing things like this to women on account of their gender, this is "cultural".
It is slavery and barbarism, period. And we should all be outraged. We should all be fighting. We should all demand more from our government when interacting with governments that support mutational and rape and murder and beating and subjugation and marginalization women by law.
I strongly feel that the most important thing for us to do in the western world is to make sure that we do not contribute to the misogynistic rituals in our culture. We need to fight against the common use of dehumanizing words like b**** on television. We need to demand that popular culture not sensationalize rape and abuse and degradation of women.
There is no law against using the word n***** on television, however you don't hear white people on popular shows referring to blacks using this word. That is because we have made it socially unacceptable. But, when you examine popular TV shows, movies, really any media - you hear insults hurled at women from men. This verbal dehumanization sets the stage for violence against women and desensitizes us to hatred and physical violence against women.
The revolution starts with you. It starts with saying no more. I will no longer support popular culture media, products, advertisement, churches or religions that create an environment hostile towards women. I will no longer just laugh when a male friend uses derogatory language to describe a women in front of me. I will no longer just bob my head when misogynistic lyrics are flowing through my friends speakers. I will no longer accept that I am "implied" in the divine.
Speak up. Take a stand. Change the environment. Demand respect. Demand an environment that respects you. This is the way to change.
This society has conditioned our youth to consider abuse of women - standard. The pornography industry has boomed mostly with imagery that degrades women - urinating on women, choking women - this has become "erotic". How can we stand by and let people make films of torturing, raping, and at times simulating killing women for entertainment?! How then do you expect to have any sensitivity left when seeing a woman beaten overseas? When you have been saturated with imagery and media of all types that show women as less than human?
This is how you revolutionize your small part of the world. You create small parts of the world where it is not ok to publicly humiliate or subjugate women. This supports humanizing women. And once we get women to be perceived as human, humans will react as we always do to injustice and violations of human rights.
So take what is written in the article in the link, and imagine that one racial group was doing this to another racial group on the basis of race and see how you react compared to how you react when someone tells you these things are happening to women because of their gender which unfortunately most are inclined to feel comfortable with as a matter of "culture".
Check out this article. This is an essential read for those who haven't yet grasped the extent of the problem of misogyny in the Arab world, and in general. Due to the the deeply engrained idea that women are less than human, I think it makes many people numb to the barbaric treatment that women are subjected to around the world. Although something as heinous as cutting off a persons genitals should create outrage, often among the masses it is brushed off as "cultural". The systematic hatred or murdering of human beings because of immutable differences or race or religious belief almost always is considered civil war, or genocide -- EXCEPT -- if the victims are women. Then it's cultural?
I remember a scene in the movie A Time to Kill where a black girl is raped by a group of white men in the segregated south, and in the courtroom in order to evoke any sympathy from the jury, the lawyer has to describe the violent acts committed against the girl and ask the jury to imagine that she was white.
The same concept applies here. In the segregated Jim Crow south, many whites did not consider blacks human and so were insensitive to crimes committed against them.
People only react to and fight for the rights of those who they consider "human" as well.
The reason why someone can tell you there is a country where 1/2 the population is made to subjugate themselves to the level of slaves and sometimes animals, and there can be no reaction is only when you see that person as less than a person.
If I told you they were cutting the genitals off of dogs en mass there may be some groups who had more of a reaction.
But when you hear about the atrocities committed against women, take a moment and imagine that the group is a racial minority and the atrocities are committed by a racial/ethnic majority group.
If I told you that in a certain country, white were cutting off the genitals of all blacks to make them "easier to control sexually" I bet many folks would write their congressperson right now asking what are we doing about this.
Because these atrocities are happening to "people". But if men are doing things like this to women on account of their gender, this is "cultural".
It is slavery and barbarism, period. And we should all be outraged. We should all be fighting. We should all demand more from our government when interacting with governments that support mutational and rape and murder and beating and subjugation and marginalization women by law.
I strongly feel that the most important thing for us to do in the western world is to make sure that we do not contribute to the misogynistic rituals in our culture. We need to fight against the common use of dehumanizing words like b**** on television. We need to demand that popular culture not sensationalize rape and abuse and degradation of women.
There is no law against using the word n***** on television, however you don't hear white people on popular shows referring to blacks using this word. That is because we have made it socially unacceptable. But, when you examine popular TV shows, movies, really any media - you hear insults hurled at women from men. This verbal dehumanization sets the stage for violence against women and desensitizes us to hatred and physical violence against women.
The revolution starts with you. It starts with saying no more. I will no longer support popular culture media, products, advertisement, churches or religions that create an environment hostile towards women. I will no longer just laugh when a male friend uses derogatory language to describe a women in front of me. I will no longer just bob my head when misogynistic lyrics are flowing through my friends speakers. I will no longer accept that I am "implied" in the divine.
Speak up. Take a stand. Change the environment. Demand respect. Demand an environment that respects you. This is the way to change.
This society has conditioned our youth to consider abuse of women - standard. The pornography industry has boomed mostly with imagery that degrades women - urinating on women, choking women - this has become "erotic". How can we stand by and let people make films of torturing, raping, and at times simulating killing women for entertainment?! How then do you expect to have any sensitivity left when seeing a woman beaten overseas? When you have been saturated with imagery and media of all types that show women as less than human?
This is how you revolutionize your small part of the world. You create small parts of the world where it is not ok to publicly humiliate or subjugate women. This supports humanizing women. And once we get women to be perceived as human, humans will react as we always do to injustice and violations of human rights.
So take what is written in the article in the link, and imagine that one racial group was doing this to another racial group on the basis of race and see how you react compared to how you react when someone tells you these things are happening to women because of their gender which unfortunately most are inclined to feel comfortable with as a matter of "culture".
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
How are Women Doing in the World?
Well this is one persons opinion about this question:
"The atmosphere of benign neglect, compounded by the rooted gender inequality, all adds up to a death sentence for countless millions of women in the developing world. For whatever reason, we can't break the monolith of indifference and paralysis."
"There is no greater emblem of international hypocrisy than the promise of women's rights." -- UN Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, Stephen Lewis
http://www.globalpovertyproject.com/infobank/women
What do you think? How are Women Doing in the World?
Here are some facts:
[] Women make up half of the world's population and yet represent a staggering 70% of the world's poor.
[] Worldwide, there are 32 million 'missing women'
[] 100 to 140 million girls and women around the world have undergone genital mutilation, including 6.5 million in Western countries.
[] Of the 500,000 women who die in childbirth every year, 99% live in developing countries. In other words, in developing countries, a girl or a woman dies every minute in giving birth.
[] Women work two-thirds of the world's working hours, produce half of the world's food, but earn only 10% of the world's income and own less than one percent of the world's property. On average, women earn half of what men earn.
[] Three million women die each year because of gender-based violence, and four million girls and women a year are sold into prostitution.
[] One woman in five is a victim of rape or attempted rape during her lifetime.
[] Gender-based violence takes more of a toll on women's health than that of traffic accidents and malaria combined.
[] Women make up 70% of the world's one billion poorest people.
Above Stats Taken from: http://www.globalpovertyproject.com/infobank/women
Accessed: 3/28/12
Monday, March 26, 2012
Beaten Down by Church - Ritualized Female Self Dis-empowerment
The complete exclusion of the feminine identity from the divine in traditional western thought and religion is devastating to the psychological health and self image of men and women and creates an affirmation of male control, domination, and authority in the church that is nearly impossible for women to argue against when faced with these same constructs within secular economic, political, and social spheres, since "God" condones the construct of male domination and even "requires" her to "submit" to it in order to be"obedient" to God and righteously adhere to the traditional Western/Christian faith.
The analogy that many patriarchal Christians use and that is quoted from the bible* is that "the husband is to be to the wife as Jesus was to the church". Well Jesus is Lord, and is the head of the church, so . . . you get the picture.
*Ephesians 5:22, 28-31. "Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, even as Christ is head of the church; and he is the savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so let wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wife as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it . . . So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church . . . For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shal.1 be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh".
So as you seek a place of refuge from the bitter cold discrimination and stifling of your voice in the secular world, at work, politically, and otherwise; you are brought to relieve this in a temple that does not acknowledge or see you or any aspect of you in the divine. You seek refuge in a place where once again, your voice is second, your identity never spoken only "implied", and your command taken from masculinity. Surely this reinforces and validates what the world has shown you all along, so why, how could you mount up rage against what is ordained by God? Finally, you go to your home where you are supposed to find love, and if there is a male there - he often requires that you continue your efforts in subjugation in honor of him, after all you must model what you just worshiped and learned in church, he is the head, you are the follower. Notions of 1 head, in in environment where there are clearly 2 brains still baffles me and the inefficiency and injustice in this concept when both of those brains are human brains registers to me as one of the most diluted plans for successful family life and world that we have yet to invent as humans. And if you are like most, you are raising children to see you as less than your male counterpart - he is the authority figure - he has last say. So in my opinion the stripping of femininity from the divine, the rejection of the feminine from the divine, and the complete masculinization of the divine is perhaps the most dangerous of all constructs of domination and oppression since this is psychologically manipulating to the female psyche, far more damaging than any harm done to the flesh; and if successful will result in her reinforcing and contributing to her OWN unintentional and intentional continual deconstruction of her power in her efforts to achieve spiritual virtue. It makes her spiritual quest, her aspirations to find acceptance in the divine, her aspiration to be righteous dependent upon her acceptance and efforts to achieve her own self dis-empowerment. The destruction of the feminine identity of the divine, the complete exclusion of anything feminine within the definition of the divine, ritualized female self dehumanization. It ritualized the repeated stripping of the divine of femininity, and female self dis-empowerment. It also reinforces domination theory as "divine" and "right" and it gives indisputable validation to male claims to male "inherent" and "divinely given" authority OVER the female. In fact, as they stand, these constructs necessitate female subjugation as an important and essential activity of the "righteous" Christian-Judea male in his aspiration for righteousness. And makes it very difficult to engage people in thoughts to the contrary, because to dispute this is blasphemous! Meanwhile, while you will have significant opposition to this argument among traditional Christians who argue that it is blasphemous not to consider god the "Father", they often were the same ones who challenged white images of Christ arguing that praising and worshiping a white divinity and the exclusion of other races from the image of the divine was damaging to the formation of healthy self-worth of non-whites.
Yes I went there. Check out Corey Golkes on this topic, excerpts and URL for a great article below.
And please TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK!
Below are excerpts and a link to an outstanding analysis of this:
See below Excerpts from "Re-Examinging the Sex of God and "His" Servants" by Corey Golkes
URL: http://www.rootswomen.com/articles/09022011.html
Accessed: 3/26/12
Golkes states:
"...the removal and denial of female deities and divine concepts is inextricably linked to the removal and denial of feminine authority and influence in the economic, political and social spheres.
In our society – which for the most part retains a romantic, anti-intellectual attachment to the bible and things religious – merely asking questions such as why "god" is referred to in gender-specific terms is in many people's minds as heretical as challenging the authenticity of the bible. Whenever the subject is brought up, responses range from outright anger to derision to uncomfortable attempts to change the subject.
"God" is above such carnal concerns as race and sex. But both men and women unconsciously defer to gender-specific (read masculine) definitions of the Divine when they refer to the creator using a variety of titles almost all of which reinforce the idea that the Divine is exclusively male: god, Lord, the Creator, the Father, the Master, the Boss, Papa God, the "Man above" and so on. And they often do so without stopping to ask in any detailed manner why this is so. Such is the extent to which it has been ingrained into our consciousness that gender-specific terms and titles can speak on behalf of all humanity. So much have people come to accept, in spite of the view they themselves express that the Almighty they revere is without form in the physical, carnal sense, that there can be no thinking of expressing that divine being other than in exclusively masculine terms.
However, it is very important for the reader to understand that what we are discussing here, the removal or submerging of divine femininity in Western thought began even before the very existence of what we call Western thought so that by the time the ideas that form the fundamentals of Greek, Roman and Christian worldview came into existence anti-female attitudes had already been firmly embedded in human consciousness in Eurasia.
But again, why? Why should this be so crucial? It can be argued that for hundreds of years women have taken heart and inspiration from that supposedly masculine image of god and used that image to live pure, righteous lives anyway; shining examples to others. This is true, when viewed from a particular angle. But those who argue this forget that words have power, words have influence. Words can convey thoughts, ideas and expectations that can inspire a person to accomplish tremendous things – or very little at all. In much the same way that a people of colour worshipping a white, blonde mythical figure can unconsciously defer authority to actual people who look like that – to their detriment – so too people, regardless of their sex, worshipping a deity with masculine features and masculine traits have been unconsciously conducting themselves in keeping with the cultural ideals of a predominantly masculinist culture. This is one of the main points of my argument: that even in this supposedly enlightened time, the principal barrier preventing women from being even more assertive and self-confident (than they already are) in the political and economic arenas, while at the same time doing so with the qualities and outlook normally identified exclusively with femininity, is largely psychological. In this context, the psychological barrier comes from a deep-seated acceptance of "god" as being exclusively male – with all the behaviours associated therewith. Doing so consciously and unconsciously makes it difficult for one half of humanity – women – to truly see themselves or be seen as "godly" in their natural feminine selves.
Sceptical questions and comments like these should be familiar to some: for instance, anyone who has ever attempted to discuss whether Jesus or Adam and Eve were black people – and treated with the same derision or indifference. Whether any of these characters were real, historical figures is not so much of importance here (they're not, by the way); what is important is their relevance, their psychological impact.
In fact, I have often asked, if the issue is so trivial, then how come the framers of these ideas didn't see it fit to (openly) factor in clearly feminine aspects into their ideas of the Almighty even self is "fuh manners"? It would not have affected anything, right? Setting aside the semi-literate bible-wavers (and Qur'an-wavers too for that matter) who remain firm in their assumptions that all this came through men "inspired by god" and so never give it any thought, we need to see that this was something that had an historical beginning and something that has far reaching implications.
The point is that given the influence the supernatural – Divine/religion/etc – had on the minds of people in ancient societies, "god" was corralled into justifying masculine-oriented customs that served the interests of these ancient patriarchists.
Reconceptualising "god" or the Divine to incorporate aspects associated with femininity will ultimately lead to ideas that women, feminine values and behaviours can also be equated with power and are no less suitable than men to control power. Wrestling with the question of the "sex" of the Almighty and by extension female authority even in the divine sphere may very well be the last hurdle in bringing about a more balanced society."
The analogy that many patriarchal Christians use and that is quoted from the bible* is that "the husband is to be to the wife as Jesus was to the church". Well Jesus is Lord, and is the head of the church, so . . . you get the picture.
*Ephesians 5:22, 28-31. "Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, even as Christ is head of the church; and he is the savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so let wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wife as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it . . . So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church . . . For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shal.1 be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh".
So as you seek a place of refuge from the bitter cold discrimination and stifling of your voice in the secular world, at work, politically, and otherwise; you are brought to relieve this in a temple that does not acknowledge or see you or any aspect of you in the divine. You seek refuge in a place where once again, your voice is second, your identity never spoken only "implied", and your command taken from masculinity. Surely this reinforces and validates what the world has shown you all along, so why, how could you mount up rage against what is ordained by God? Finally, you go to your home where you are supposed to find love, and if there is a male there - he often requires that you continue your efforts in subjugation in honor of him, after all you must model what you just worshiped and learned in church, he is the head, you are the follower. Notions of 1 head, in in environment where there are clearly 2 brains still baffles me and the inefficiency and injustice in this concept when both of those brains are human brains registers to me as one of the most diluted plans for successful family life and world that we have yet to invent as humans. And if you are like most, you are raising children to see you as less than your male counterpart - he is the authority figure - he has last say. So in my opinion the stripping of femininity from the divine, the rejection of the feminine from the divine, and the complete masculinization of the divine is perhaps the most dangerous of all constructs of domination and oppression since this is psychologically manipulating to the female psyche, far more damaging than any harm done to the flesh; and if successful will result in her reinforcing and contributing to her OWN unintentional and intentional continual deconstruction of her power in her efforts to achieve spiritual virtue. It makes her spiritual quest, her aspirations to find acceptance in the divine, her aspiration to be righteous dependent upon her acceptance and efforts to achieve her own self dis-empowerment. The destruction of the feminine identity of the divine, the complete exclusion of anything feminine within the definition of the divine, ritualized female self dehumanization. It ritualized the repeated stripping of the divine of femininity, and female self dis-empowerment. It also reinforces domination theory as "divine" and "right" and it gives indisputable validation to male claims to male "inherent" and "divinely given" authority OVER the female. In fact, as they stand, these constructs necessitate female subjugation as an important and essential activity of the "righteous" Christian-Judea male in his aspiration for righteousness. And makes it very difficult to engage people in thoughts to the contrary, because to dispute this is blasphemous! Meanwhile, while you will have significant opposition to this argument among traditional Christians who argue that it is blasphemous not to consider god the "Father", they often were the same ones who challenged white images of Christ arguing that praising and worshiping a white divinity and the exclusion of other races from the image of the divine was damaging to the formation of healthy self-worth of non-whites.
Yes I went there. Check out Corey Golkes on this topic, excerpts and URL for a great article below.
And please TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK!
Below are excerpts and a link to an outstanding analysis of this:
See below Excerpts from "Re-Examinging the Sex of God and "His" Servants" by Corey Golkes
URL: http://www.rootswomen.com/articles/09022011.html
Accessed: 3/26/12
Golkes states:
"...the removal and denial of female deities and divine concepts is inextricably linked to the removal and denial of feminine authority and influence in the economic, political and social spheres.
In our society – which for the most part retains a romantic, anti-intellectual attachment to the bible and things religious – merely asking questions such as why "god" is referred to in gender-specific terms is in many people's minds as heretical as challenging the authenticity of the bible. Whenever the subject is brought up, responses range from outright anger to derision to uncomfortable attempts to change the subject.
"God" is above such carnal concerns as race and sex. But both men and women unconsciously defer to gender-specific (read masculine) definitions of the Divine when they refer to the creator using a variety of titles almost all of which reinforce the idea that the Divine is exclusively male: god, Lord, the Creator, the Father, the Master, the Boss, Papa God, the "Man above" and so on. And they often do so without stopping to ask in any detailed manner why this is so. Such is the extent to which it has been ingrained into our consciousness that gender-specific terms and titles can speak on behalf of all humanity. So much have people come to accept, in spite of the view they themselves express that the Almighty they revere is without form in the physical, carnal sense, that there can be no thinking of expressing that divine being other than in exclusively masculine terms.
However, it is very important for the reader to understand that what we are discussing here, the removal or submerging of divine femininity in Western thought began even before the very existence of what we call Western thought so that by the time the ideas that form the fundamentals of Greek, Roman and Christian worldview came into existence anti-female attitudes had already been firmly embedded in human consciousness in Eurasia.
But again, why? Why should this be so crucial? It can be argued that for hundreds of years women have taken heart and inspiration from that supposedly masculine image of god and used that image to live pure, righteous lives anyway; shining examples to others. This is true, when viewed from a particular angle. But those who argue this forget that words have power, words have influence. Words can convey thoughts, ideas and expectations that can inspire a person to accomplish tremendous things – or very little at all. In much the same way that a people of colour worshipping a white, blonde mythical figure can unconsciously defer authority to actual people who look like that – to their detriment – so too people, regardless of their sex, worshipping a deity with masculine features and masculine traits have been unconsciously conducting themselves in keeping with the cultural ideals of a predominantly masculinist culture. This is one of the main points of my argument: that even in this supposedly enlightened time, the principal barrier preventing women from being even more assertive and self-confident (than they already are) in the political and economic arenas, while at the same time doing so with the qualities and outlook normally identified exclusively with femininity, is largely psychological. In this context, the psychological barrier comes from a deep-seated acceptance of "god" as being exclusively male – with all the behaviours associated therewith. Doing so consciously and unconsciously makes it difficult for one half of humanity – women – to truly see themselves or be seen as "godly" in their natural feminine selves.
Sceptical questions and comments like these should be familiar to some: for instance, anyone who has ever attempted to discuss whether Jesus or Adam and Eve were black people – and treated with the same derision or indifference. Whether any of these characters were real, historical figures is not so much of importance here (they're not, by the way); what is important is their relevance, their psychological impact.
In fact, I have often asked, if the issue is so trivial, then how come the framers of these ideas didn't see it fit to (openly) factor in clearly feminine aspects into their ideas of the Almighty even self is "fuh manners"? It would not have affected anything, right? Setting aside the semi-literate bible-wavers (and Qur'an-wavers too for that matter) who remain firm in their assumptions that all this came through men "inspired by god" and so never give it any thought, we need to see that this was something that had an historical beginning and something that has far reaching implications.
The point is that given the influence the supernatural – Divine/religion/etc – had on the minds of people in ancient societies, "god" was corralled into justifying masculine-oriented customs that served the interests of these ancient patriarchists.
Reconceptualising "god" or the Divine to incorporate aspects associated with femininity will ultimately lead to ideas that women, feminine values and behaviours can also be equated with power and are no less suitable than men to control power. Wrestling with the question of the "sex" of the Almighty and by extension female authority even in the divine sphere may very well be the last hurdle in bringing about a more balanced society."
Shout out Watoto - Blog Topic: Instruments of their own oppression
"Part of the mechanics of oppressing people is to pervert them to the extent that they become the instruments of their own oppression." Kumasi in "Crips & Bloods: Made in America"
It has taken me some time now, but I understand. It still hurts and boils my blood but I have focused on resolution. How can I fix it, not I just can't believe it.
Women, that is, particularly women of color participating in their own demise. When Lil Wayne puts out a song that denigrates a woman to and I paraphrase here: open her legs for a price (filet Mignon) sisters blog and cry out about the fact that the woman he wishes to denigrate and exploit is "red bone", and how he doesn't want to degrade and dehumanize a dark skinned woman. Really?
Is that the issue with this one? Is it the shade of her skin what we should focus on or the fact that because of her sex she is being dehumanized?
But then, I forget about oppression. The success of black oppression, classism, and sexism have converged upon the minority woman in ways that for long time now have been self sustaining.
She herself will request to be the one degraded. I find black women posting on blogs demanding that he talk about some dark skinned women too since his focus on "red bone" women is colorist and hurtful. What? "Why don't you want to sexually exploit a dark skinned black woman huh huh ?" They ask with disdain. But why do we live in a world that glorifies, celebrates, and rewards you lil Wayne for sexually exploiting women. This is what is missing from the conversation. Nod to Watoto from the Nile, the 10 year old among one of us who got this part of it.
I am not saying that colorism isn't an issue. I am just saying that to overlook the fact that the entire construct is damaging and wrong is a little short sighted. But when you are so conditioned as not to respond to someone's blatant dehumanization of you because you've accepted that status, all you can see is the race aspect. Black women in particular are very in tune with racism and will almost uniformly join together in defense of race, but when sexism and racism converge as they often do in the black woman's experience, she sees and focuses only on race. How can this be reconciled with the reality that she likely has 1 in 4 of her friends who have been victims of rape, how can she continue to overlook that because of her sex people in washington are trying to take away her reproductive rights? , because of her sex she is limited in her options for equal pay and wealth in this society, because of her sex she will meet oppression and discrimination that threatens her very life. How can it be? Then you remember, she is an instrument of her own oppression.
Yes "colorism" is important and not to be diminished. But don't miss the blatant disregard for your status as human and the glorified denigration to sexual object for sale by your "brothers" who are as much a victim in this as you in their own demise. By degrading black women they buy into the patriarchy norms of American culture which requires of them to define their masculinity by dissolving the humanity of women.
It has taken me some time now, but I understand. It still hurts and boils my blood but I have focused on resolution. How can I fix it, not I just can't believe it.
Women, that is, particularly women of color participating in their own demise. When Lil Wayne puts out a song that denigrates a woman to and I paraphrase here: open her legs for a price (filet Mignon) sisters blog and cry out about the fact that the woman he wishes to denigrate and exploit is "red bone", and how he doesn't want to degrade and dehumanize a dark skinned woman. Really?
Is that the issue with this one? Is it the shade of her skin what we should focus on or the fact that because of her sex she is being dehumanized?
But then, I forget about oppression. The success of black oppression, classism, and sexism have converged upon the minority woman in ways that for long time now have been self sustaining.
She herself will request to be the one degraded. I find black women posting on blogs demanding that he talk about some dark skinned women too since his focus on "red bone" women is colorist and hurtful. What? "Why don't you want to sexually exploit a dark skinned black woman huh huh ?" They ask with disdain. But why do we live in a world that glorifies, celebrates, and rewards you lil Wayne for sexually exploiting women. This is what is missing from the conversation. Nod to Watoto from the Nile, the 10 year old among one of us who got this part of it.
I am not saying that colorism isn't an issue. I am just saying that to overlook the fact that the entire construct is damaging and wrong is a little short sighted. But when you are so conditioned as not to respond to someone's blatant dehumanization of you because you've accepted that status, all you can see is the race aspect. Black women in particular are very in tune with racism and will almost uniformly join together in defense of race, but when sexism and racism converge as they often do in the black woman's experience, she sees and focuses only on race. How can this be reconciled with the reality that she likely has 1 in 4 of her friends who have been victims of rape, how can she continue to overlook that because of her sex people in washington are trying to take away her reproductive rights? , because of her sex she is limited in her options for equal pay and wealth in this society, because of her sex she will meet oppression and discrimination that threatens her very life. How can it be? Then you remember, she is an instrument of her own oppression.
Yes "colorism" is important and not to be diminished. But don't miss the blatant disregard for your status as human and the glorified denigration to sexual object for sale by your "brothers" who are as much a victim in this as you in their own demise. By degrading black women they buy into the patriarchy norms of American culture which requires of them to define their masculinity by dissolving the humanity of women.
Saturday, March 24, 2012
I SEE a woman
I remember the first time that I saw a woman. I mean that I really appreciated woman in all of her glory. This was when I was in medical school working in labor and delivery on my ob/gyn rotation. I had followed women in the clinic prepartum and seen women develop through their pregnancies. I had then worked in delivering the babies and seen women push children into existence. Neither of these had I really seen these women. I then moved on to the ward part of my rotation, and I was responsible now for evaluating women postpartum in the maternity ward. One morning I went to check on a patient. She was a black woman, very dark skin; she had just given birth the night before. She was sitting up in the hospital bed, the room was lit by sun that was shining in from small cracks in the window and fell on her right side. She had very long black black hair, parted in the middle, that framed her face and traveled down to her abdomen. She was nursing her baby on her breast. She was wearing an ivory gown. The contrast of her black hair and skin with her gown and the sun shining on the white of the gown and the sheets made it look like she was glowing I mean radiating with light and energy. And I thought - THIS is divinity. I had NEVER really appreciated the unspeakable, incomprehensible, amazing work this woman had done and what she was in that moment. She had produced a living being, and then she generated from her own body food! To this day I still don't fully understand the magnificence and power of that. It has been so under appreciated, discussed, pondered, revered and been made to be so no big deal."She had a baby". That's it. So I wasn't prepared for how glorious it was to see a woman actually create and introduce life into this world. The magnitude of the what a woman's unique physical ability really was came into focus for me at that moment. I never EVER looked at women the same way. I had lived many years of my life, and never appreciated what a woman truly was or could do or the incredible amazement of the gift of life that she gives. I realized that is the first time I ever SAW a woman. I also realized I had never really seen myself. Once you know what and who you are no one can make you settle for anything less.
I sincerely believe that one of the major problems in our world is the lack of self value among women. This I think leads to their acceptance of the abuse that unfortunately leads to their higher rates of diabetes and heart disease from all the compensatory bad overeating, their under-eating disorders on the alternative extreme (anorexia etc.), their risky behavior and higher AIDs rates, staying in relationships of domestic violence and their perpetually higher poverty rate then men. Of course all of this amplified in the poor communities with minority women. Tack on the hip hop music that says you're a ** and a *****, magazine ads that say you have to look like a computer generated image which you will never achieve, add on discrimination in the work force, top it all off with a church that says you're a "helper" & god is male and never mentions you, mix that all up with poverty in a capitalistic society that says you're nothing if you're poor, finally add in 25% are raped or molested and you have a recipe for really low self esteem.
So part of my multifaceted approach to helping the most vulnerable groups among us - obviously poor people, minorities, and the grand combo - poor minority women - is to do something to improve self esteem in women. I think without this - no program or law could meaningfully change their circumstances.
What about you? When was the first time you really SAW a woman? Tell me what you saw and how. . .
Friday, March 23, 2012
Dual Consciousness
DuBois on the Double Consciousness . . . ."a world which yields him no true self-consciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other world. It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One ever feels his two-ness,--an American, a Negro; two warring souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder" "It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one-self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity." Ernest Allen Jr.'s On the Reading of Riddles: Rethinking DuBoisian Double Consciousness from Existence in Black
I would argue that women struggle with this to an extreme degree.
You look at yourself through the eyes of the looker - the patriarchy that you attempt to be acceptable to.
You behave like the object that you think and know they believe you to be so that you are acceptable and desirable to them.
Yet, somewhere deep inside who you really are, your humanity struggles with resistance to this performance and an inner strife like no other ensues.
Since for women, this occurs in the outside world, but also in the confines of her home; among those who openly hate her and also along side her in her own bed beside those who are her intimate partners; she has no shelter anywhere.
And for women of color who are marginalized outside of the home due to their race and gender, to have to come inside of her home and experience the same dehumanization due to her gender by those closest to her - her intimate partner and the children she bore - it is unthinkable that she has a moment uninterrupted by torment.
I would argue that women struggle with this to an extreme degree.
You look at yourself through the eyes of the looker - the patriarchy that you attempt to be acceptable to.
You behave like the object that you think and know they believe you to be so that you are acceptable and desirable to them.
Yet, somewhere deep inside who you really are, your humanity struggles with resistance to this performance and an inner strife like no other ensues.
Since for women, this occurs in the outside world, but also in the confines of her home; among those who openly hate her and also along side her in her own bed beside those who are her intimate partners; she has no shelter anywhere.
And for women of color who are marginalized outside of the home due to their race and gender, to have to come inside of her home and experience the same dehumanization due to her gender by those closest to her - her intimate partner and the children she bore - it is unthinkable that she has a moment uninterrupted by torment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)