Women

Victimized or Attention-Seeking?

After the Epic Grammy Fail of allowing Chris Brown to “redeem” himself by performing, there was an understandable amount of backlash. What I didn’t quite follow was why some people still wanted to blame the victim.

I saw several comments about how Rihanna is a “drama queen,” that she was milking it, and that she tends to attract this sort of thing. My question is, does that make it okay for Chris Brown to bash her face in? Seriously? On what planet, regardless of a person’s propensity for the bizarre, is it okay—ever—for a significant other to send them to the hospital? No, really, I want to know.

The worst part is, this attitude is far from being a few nutcases on the fringe. Otherwise normal, reasonable people still want to blame the victim, especially in partner violence. Some people think it’s their right to wonder what the victim did to provoke it, what they could have done to stop it, or what they should do in the future to prevent it.

It happens with rape, too. I took a “violence prevention course” back in college. I recall thinking even then that the class had the feel of blaming the victim. If one of us had been violated, would it really have been our fault that we didn’t carry our keys in hand and remember to poo on the attacker to deter him?

If there is any question about whether or not Chris Brown is a) sorry and b) still a girlfriend-beating a-hole, then let me put it to rest. Here are his two tweets after the controversy. Note that neither is any attempt at remorse or apology:

HATE ALL U WANT BECUZ I GOT A GRAMMY Now! That’s the ultimate F**** OFF!

IM BACK SO WATCH MY BaCK as I walk away from all this negativity #teambreezygrammy.

Really, Chris Brown? That’s your best shot? How about, “I was wrong and I’m sorry. I’m trying to be a different person. It’s not okay to hurt others.”

Message for everyone who still thinks that Rihanna “deserved” it somehow, or at least benefited from it: Shut up.

Message for people who have lived through abuse from a significant other: It’s not your fault. You didn’t deserve it. Talking about it isn’t shameful, it helps others who are living through it too. It’s not your fault. People who think asking for help and sharing your story mean you love drama are not worth your time. No, really, it’s not your fault. You’re not a bad person if you returned to that relationship. It’s not your fault.

More than a Dress-Up Doll

Women

There was a lot of backlash after Sunday’s Super Bowl ads. I admit that I didn’t pay much attention to most of the event, the game or the ads. But the one commercial I saw disturbed me, and the ones I heard about the next day even more so.

Sometimes I feel like we women stand up on the rooftops of the world, screaming our lungs out, only to be drowned by the voices of so many people who think we’re just being bitchy. I’ve had more than enough of the way that media exploits women. From the ideal body to the ideal sex partner to the ideal career woman (attractive, able to balance it all, and not too “mannish”), we’ve been whored out to the public long enough. And don’t even start on me about how it’s happening to men, too. No, it’s not, at least not in the same way.

If I sound angry, it’s because I am.

There are dozens of ways in which we have been reduced to little more than elegant mannequins (or possibly blow-up dolls, to be a bit more crude). A few points of comparison (and if you think I’m making this up, try using Google):

•Female nudity is played up for sexuality, male for humor:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlupKmjFOw4&w=560&h=315]
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWrJgFjxlS0&w=560&h=315]

•On film, full frontal female nudity earns only an R rating. Any full exposure of male anatomy is an NC-17.

•Women’s bodies are used to sell just about everything.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTlmho_RovY&w=560&h=315]

•Half-clothed women are often seen in the company of fully dressed men.

Is it any wonder that we have trouble distinguishing between when a woman is being modest and when she isn’t? We’re training ourselves to view women as objects, rather than people. We’re continuing to allow women to be viewed as the property of men, available 24/7 for their enjoyment.

We’re not going to get anywhere when we talk about women in leadership (of any type) if we don’t get this problem under control. Those of us in the church must first talk about the ways in which women are exploited before we can begin talking about purity, modesty, and the role of women in the church. We can’t be silent on this as we have on so many other cultural issues. Once again, we are being called on to stand up and be the church.

The degradation of women must stop.

My Life, In Purple Font

Bible, Blogs, Faith and Spirituality, Family, Life, Links, Odds 'n' Ends, Religion, Sexuality and Gender, Women, Writing

I’m a scheduler by nature. I like to have a calendar handy. I use Google Calendar because there are four people under this roof. It’s easier to have everyone’s life neatly typed in using multi-colored blocks. I got the purple ones, of course.

I prefer a paper calendar. It’s visually appealing to me. It took a long time to get used to this new-fangled electronic planner. In fact, the only reason I use it is that I can access the calendar on my phone. I can now check everyone’s schedule before I make my next appointment at the dentist’s office, for example. Very handy.

Anyway, I’m now wildly off-topic. Sorry.

The whole point of bringing up the scheduling thing is that I want to be able to organize my blog a little better. I’ve read that it’s best to stick to one general “thing” on a blog, such as faith, sex, writing, sex, etc. I failed that test. I tend to write about whatever pops into my head at the moment. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, necessarily. But it’s probably confusing for the three or four people a month who stumble upon my blog and find that I don’t write exclusively about ~~sex~~ one thing.

So I’ve decided, for the sake of the ten people who actually read my blog, that I will organize the heck out of it. That way, if you only want to read my posts on sex (and who doesn’t like to read about sex?), you will know what day to visit. Those of you who were blushing at my last sentence (you know who you are) can skip those posts.

Here’s the New and Improved! blog schedule:

Mondays: Faith, theology, and the Bible. Here, more good stuff about literalism, interpretation, cool stuff I find in Scripture.

Tuesdays: Blogs, Twitter, and around the Web. People I follow, blogs I read, stuff I find. Featuring people a lot more interesting than I am.

Wednesdays: Women. I think that sums it up, right?

Thursdays: LGBT issues. Inspired by Naked Pastor David Hayward’s Gay Thursdays, I will also talk about these things on Thursdays. Hey, maybe we can start a trend!

Fridays: Kids and Family. Because I do like to talk about my kids, of course.

Saturdays: Everything else. Sometimes, there’s just no good place to put it. So it goes here. I suppose that includes my occasional rant about writing.

Sundays: I don’t post on Sunday. Even God took a break.

So there it is. If I don’t have anything to say that week, I’m giving myself permission to post exactly nothing. And sorry, I didn’t include a category for sex. I guess you’ll just have to be surprised.

Religious Conservatives: Why the Fear of Women?

Women

I read this article yesterday on religious extremists and their view of women. In the post, Dr. Peggy Drexler details some of the horrific ways women have been treated at the hands of ultra-conservative men. Women have been viciously attacked, being perceived as a threat to male spiritual discipline. We typically (and at least in the physical sense, rightly) associate these attacks with places in the Middle East.

This quote from Dr. Drexler stood out to me:

As I watched, I wondered: What is it about women that the men of deeply conservative religions find so threatening?

What, indeed?

Dr. Drexler explains it this way, and I think she’s right:

Find a place where men oppress women, and you’ll hear the same justification: we’re doing it for their own protection. It’s not protection. It’s projection.

The logic: My sexual urges take me away from a focus on God. Women cause me to have those urges. The obvious solution is to beat them down, cover them up, and lock them away. What I can’t see won’t tempt me.

The same underlying attitudes which lead to brutal victimization of women can be found in conservative Christian circles here in the U. S. It’s just another manifestation of the old Madonna-Whore Complex. Men have reduced women to a choice between two opposite, and equally objectifying, alternatives. In fact, we have become the embodiment of both simultaneously. We are vile temptresses, luring men to sinful depths, in need of strong husbands to protect us and lead us down the path to righteousness. Obviously, we have no idea the effect we are having on them!

Strangely enough, a lot of men seem to want it both ways. They want their wives and girlfriends to act like the Madonna (at least in public). But they want the Whore, too, in the form of media (with its unrealistic vision of women and our bodies). Separating and reducing enables men to continue to blame women and prevents them from uderstanding that women are much more complex than either of the artificially created, two-dimensional caricatures.

It also keeps them from having to face what it is about women that is so terrifying to them.

Not all men are like this. I believe that there are many men who simply have never questioned the way they were raised or taught. They have never thought about whether what they’ve heard at church fits with reality at all. I have great hope for those men. It’s the ones who insist that they “love and respect” women while continuing to lord it over us, assuming authority they do not have.

Dr. Drexler’s summary says it all for me:

Why is female sexuality and empowerment so deeply threatening to the conservative religious cultures? What would happen to those cultures if women were free to make their own sexual choices, and exercise their own personal power? Would free, healthy, sexual, productive women bring down a society or dramatically strengthen it?

How can we make positive changes that liberate women from the Madonna-Whore Complex?

Being a Woman Would Be Boring!

Women

I’m having a Proud Mom moment, and I had to share.

S and I have been working on her handwriting. In each chapter, there is a concept (animals, foods, shapes). There are various activities designed to give the student a chance to practice writing the words:

We’re working on career words. Her book shows pictures of different people doing their jobs—doctor, nurse, dentist, teacher, farmer, pilot, firefighter, police officer, barber, grocer, construction worker, chef, and artist. S and I noticed that almost none of the pictures show women. In fact, the only jobs it shows being done by women are the nurse, the teacher, and the dentist. Every other picture shows a man doing the job.

We’ve been talking about it, and how even though the pictures don’t show women, women can do all of those jobs. The other day, she seemed rather fed up with seeing only pictures of men. Our conversation went like this:

S: It’s dumb that they only show men.

Me: Why is that?

S: Women can do those jobs too. Women can do anything they want.

Me: Yes, they can. We’ve been talking about that. Why do you think it’s important?

S: Because if those [nurse, teacher, and dentist] were really our only choices, that would be boring!

Me: You’re right, it would be.

S [scornfully]: This book must have been written by a man.

I like to hope that I’m doing a good job with S, making sure she knows that her options aren’t limited. It’s funny, I’m trying to teach her that she can be a strong, independent woman, when I have fallen into a fairly traditional role. I’ve been a stay-at-home mom for over eight years, and my two degrees are in…nursing and education. But I chose this life, I wasn’t forced into it. My husband would have been just as happy to be married to me if I’d been a doctor and he’d been a stay-at-home dad, or if we’d both been police officers. He didn’t marry me because I was prepared to be his “little woman.”

Bear with me, this may seem unrelated, but it’s not. The other night, one of our church elders came to see us about some business. (Relax, it was all good. It wasn’t one of those kinds of meetings.) During part of the conversation, he praised me for valuing our kids and staying home with them. But he also praised women who hold jobs outside the home, speaking blessings over their work. He’s a fairly traditional guy, but the whole time the three of us were talking, I never once felt as though he didn’t care what I was saying. He directed specific questions to each of us, but only in the sense that each of us has areas of expertise. As a woman, a mother, and a person of faith, I cannot tell you how much I appreciate the respect we received.

This is the way we expect our son to behave. This is the way we expect our daughter to be treated. So far, I think we’re on the right track.

Under Lock and Key

Sexual Morality, Women

So I know I’ve already had one post about this topic this week, but thanks to an email I received the other day, I’m back to it again. After reading the email, I resisted the urge to rip my hair out at the roots. Instead, here is part of the text, with my comments interspersed:

I have a friend named Paul who told me about the wedding of his daughter. He said that part of the wedding ceremony was the passing on of a single gold key on a necklace. When his daughter was a young girl, just entering puberty, Paul gave her a gold key on a chain. He also bought one for himself. He told her that he wanted her to wear the gold key around her neck to represent her commitment to sexual purity. That she would remain a virgin until marriage, guarding herself from any form of sexual expression or experience that would dishonor God and be harmful to herself. And then He would wear one around his neck as well to reflect his commitment to guard and protect her as her father.

Does anyone else find this kind of…creepy? I am all for parents protecting their children. But I do not—NOT—want my daughter to pledge her virginity to her father. If she chooses to pledge her purity to anyone, it ought to be God. And while I applaud parents who care about their children, I don’t think this is the way to do show it. Parents should have open communication with their kids, not superficial pledges based in patriarchal customs. Not to mention how weird it makes me feel that a father would have this conversation with his prepubescent daughter.

And protect her he did! They had a rule that before a boy could take her out on a date, he had to meet Paul and ask his permission, which weeded out more than its fair share of suitors. Those young men willing to meet him were engaged in a conversation that would involve Paul talking to the boy about the key. He would tell them how precious his daughter was to him, how prized she was in his eyes and in God’s. And then he would ask the boy point blank: can I trust you with my daughter?

Again, yay for the parent meeting potential dates. It’s a good idea to know who your kid spends time with. Not so yay for the creepy stalker behavior and talking to people you (or your kid) may not know very well about her virginity.

At her wedding, here’s what happened. She gave him her key back, representing that she had fulfilled her pledge to remain a virgin until marriage. Because she had. And then, as part of the ceremony, she publicly thanked him for how he had raised her, because now she was giving the most precious gift she could give to her husband. Then Paul took the key off of his own neck, and gave it to her husband, saying that now the mantle of protection and integrity was his responsibility.

Aaargh! Aaargh! Aaargh! “Her most precious gift”????? I really, really hope that young woman had something to bring to her marriage besides her lack of sexual experience. Because if that’s the best she can give her husband, that marriage is doomed. And if her husband would have rejected her because of her past, then he has issues, too. Ugh. Don’t even get me started on the passing of the key representing how her husband now “owns” her and is responsible for not only protecting her (whatever that’s supposed to mean) but for her integrity. Last I checked, my integrity rests on my shoulders.

It also occurs to me that the creepy factor has not disappeared at the wedding. Why, oh why, does this father have anything whatsoever to do with his adult daughter’s state of virginity? I would hazard a guess that the bride is still fairly young (I honestly can’t see a thirty-five-year-old woman not demanding that key back ages ago). But I’m sure (well, I’m hoping, anyway) that she’s over eighteen, probably somewhat older. So what the heck is Dear Old Dad still doing protecting her purity? I don’t believe that it’s his business anymore.

Of course, I should note that I think this particular story is an urban legend, Christian-style. I know that people actually do this sort of thing, but this specific story just sounds like the sort of drivel that gets shared in spammy emails, but isn’t factual. It’s meant to have the same effect as all urban legends: To teach us some moral lesson. I want to believe that this purity pledge culture means well. I really do. Except that it all just comes across as closer to “your cow for my daughter” than helping young people navigate their relationships. This is a side effect of some of the other things I’ve talked about this week—idolizing virginity, the male gaze, and double standards for men and women. Is this the message we want to send to our children?

The problem with things like the purity rings or the “sex key” is that they stand as an external measure of someone’s worth. That daughter only has value as long as she keeps her key on and her legs together. I know parents want to look out for their kids and want them to make good decisions. But in this case, should that daughter lose her virginity before she’s married, she loses much more than that. She loses at least some of her worth before her father. If you think I’m exaggerating, try again. I’ve seen it happen.

What’s sad about that is that it isn’t an accurate representation of the way God deals with us. We never lose worth in God’s eyes. I may not like some things my kids do. But I will never, ever extract a promise to “be good” regarding any behavior. And should either of my children have sex before marriage, I will consider it a) their choice, not mine, and b) not my business, as it’s between them and their partner (and God).

I see no support in the Bible for this purity culture crap. I have nothing at all against waiting for sex until marriage. I support it. I commend it. But pledging to one’s parent to remain a virgin isn’t in Scripture. I see no evidence that this is how we should treat our daughters. (Or our sons, for that matter. I can’t envision myself exchanging purity rings with mine.) Instead, we should be helping our children—both boys and girls—make healthy, wise, moral decisions in their lives. We should be empowering them to trust God and make their commitments to God, not to us. And that’s something you actually can find in the Bible.

Victimized or Attention-Seeking?

More than a Dress-Up Doll

My Life, In Purple Font

Religious Conservatives: Why the Fear of Women?

Being a Woman Would Be Boring!

Under Lock and Key

Let's Be Friends

Sharing

Tip Jar

Shopping Cart

Your Shopping Cart

Supposed Crimes Publishing

Beaten Track Publishing

More Content

Let's Be Friends

Sharing

Tip Jar

Shopping Cart

Your Shopping Cart

Supposed Crimes Publishing

Beaten Track Publishing