tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post2171333900435702188..comments2024-03-23T18:50:32.902-04:00Comments on Telling Secrets: Hillary and Melanie and the Power of SexismElizabeth Kaetonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06787552280232329081noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-55211669551989704702012-09-26T12:44:44.449-04:002012-09-26T12:44:44.449-04:00just reading this made my IQ feel like it jumped 2...just reading this made my IQ feel like it jumped 20 points! Thank you. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09504671321907625206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-61277582339752117202008-02-01T11:48:00.000-05:002008-02-01T11:48:00.000-05:00Elizabeth, It's not fair. You can’t mention Hillar...Elizabeth, It's not fair. You can’t mention Hillary, “The Hillary Effect", and <BR/>then get upset when the focus shifts to politics. It is an election year and she is a candidate. It’s only natural for people to get up on their respective soap boxes and discuss the upcoming election.<BR/><BR/>So let’s try to shift back to how men view women and how women view men and all the little nuances therein. To say that it is about love and hate and primal forces and envy is to suggest that the playing field is equal. It is not equal. We have been taught from earliest childhood that it is not equal. We have been taught that women are not equal to men. We have been taught that women must be subservient to men and obey men. And just one guess as to wear this teaching comes from. <BR/><BR/> I’m going to borrow a page from Jack Spong and say it all goes back to Genesis. Man was created in God’s image and women were an afterthought. Man needed a help mate and God had exhausted all the possible four legged varieties to appease him. So God goes and makes him a helper. By definition , she is not equal. She is made up of borrowed parts (rib). She isn’t even named by God, she is named by Adam, just as he named all the other animals. So here we are four or five thousand years later wondering why some people still don’t think that women are equal to men. Every time you try to make an issue of it they point to the “word of God”. You can’t win that argument until everybody starts to rethink their basic theology. I don’t buy all the psychological mumbo jumbo. These views of men and women are learned by our children at very early ages. They are taught by adults who were in turn taught by the various churches. It’s a vicious cycle that will never be broken until we break it.<BR/><BR/>I don’t necessarily believe that the “envy” hypothesis is a male vs female issue. I think envy is a human vs human condition. Let’s go back to Cain and Able. This is yet again another myth story trying to instill in us some sense of morality. Cain was a guy and so was Able. Able had something that Cain coveted; namely the approval of God for his sacrifice. So Cain does what seems appropriate. Cain kills Able; enter CSI stage left. Most of the other morality stories from the Bible were also guy vs. guy. They just didn’t think women were worthy of much space on the written page. That in itself should tell us something. When they do talk about women it is something like Lot’s daughters getting him drunk and sleeping with him. Now there’s a great morality story and doesn’t it put women in a great light. No, this is all learned behavior and there is no getting around the lessons that women are sub-human and never to be trusted. We saw what happened to Samson when he trusted a woman.<BR/><BR/>There are cultures, however, where women are and were held in high esteem. The American Indian comes to mind. In ancient native American cultures the woman was often the property owner and sat on the tribal councils. The men were relegated to hunting and warfare. It was no big deal, the men liked going out and killing things. The women on the councils made the decisions. Even decisions on who the next chief would be. The women controlled the family, the property and they were highly respected.<BR/><BR/>That will never be the case where people still get their original concepts of men and women from a male dominated and dictated religious culture. Jack argues that we must admit that Genesis was not only myth but bad myth and bad theology.Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05623709712119761741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-43732038741434844092008-01-31T20:27:00.000-05:002008-01-31T20:27:00.000-05:00Right on.(And may I just say, again, that I like t...Right on.<BR/><BR/>(And may I just say, again, that I like the "look and feel" of the new site VERY MUCH!:)SUSAN RUSSELLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01795717638621668638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-82872908164751347252008-01-31T20:03:00.000-05:002008-01-31T20:03:00.000-05:00Okay, I'll say it one more time. I appreciate the...Okay, I'll say it one more time. I appreciate the comments, but this isn't about electing Hillary. This is about the effect of Hillary's candidacy and the effect I feel it had on the discussion in my diocese about inclusive / expansive language. <BR/><BR/>I am no psychologizing anyone. I apologize to anyone so offended if that's how it sounded. Trying to understand the psychology behind the action is my natural 'default' position. I often run up to my head when my heart is breaking. It's behavior learned after years of experience being a woman and a 'lipstick lesbian' (oh, how I hate the labeling language of internalized homophobia) in the world, my church, and my family.<BR/><BR/>That said, carry on.Elizabeth Kaetonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06787552280232329081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-32119636584058576862008-01-31T17:41:00.000-05:002008-01-31T17:41:00.000-05:00I shall be voting in the Republican primary Tuesda...I shall be voting in the Republican primary Tuesday. Illinois is clearly going to Obama in the Democrat primary so I am free to vote the anyone-but-Hukabee side. So, in a real sense I don't have a stake in this fight.<BR/><BR/>But,,,, I think it is amazing what people will buy. Mrs. Clinton is a first term senator who never won an election before she became senator. Mr. Obama was an Illinois State Senator for two terms before he went to Washington. He is inexperienced? Talk about bi-costal arrogance. Hello, there is space between the Hudson and the Pacific!<BR/><BR/>FWIW<BR/>jimBJimBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17312606954135884910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-38187824941838534012008-01-31T16:47:00.000-05:002008-01-31T16:47:00.000-05:00My leaning toward voting for Hilary has nothing to...My leaning toward voting for Hilary has nothing to do with her sex. I’d be deeply disturbed if I thought it did. For me, the issues concern placement on the political spectrum and experience. I don’t believe this country would fare well under another four or eight years of Republican leadership. The balance has swung too far to the right. We started the Bush era with a surplus and we end it with another deficit. He (Bush) has taken us too close to church involvement in secular matters. The separation between church and state has been muddied if not harmed. We’re stuck in another war that we had no business being in, in the first place. I’m still waiting to see some of those weapons of mass destruction we were promised. He has injured out status with foreign countries. Whatever political capital we had after 911 has been wasted.<BR/><BR/>Looking at Hilary vs. Obama, what I see is experience and lack of experience. Obama might be ok in eight years but not just yet. Hilary has a track record. We know where she stands. She is considered one of the hardest working Senators in Washington. The only thing I really know about Obama is that he’s young and good looking. I’m really tired of people getting elected simply because they look good in front of the cameras. <BR/><BR/>There is another issue and one that is not really spoken of in the press. We are still too close to 911. A man named Obama is not going to carry votes in Middle America. I hate to say it but that happens to be the way people think. If his name was Smith he would be a shoe-in. Everybody will jump up and down now and say how could you say such a thing. Wake up and smell the coffee. People are still fearful and this is how people think.<BR/><BR/>In years past, voters used to worry whether a woman could make the difficult choices. I don’t think that is still an issue. After leaders like Maggie Thatcher and others, that sort of thinking has been put to rest. Some men will always fear powerful women. Some women will always side with their fearful husbands. They’ve been indoctrinated since they were little girls to be respectful and subservient to men in a male dominated world led by a male dominated church. I really hope that this time around, sex is a non issue and people just vote the issues.Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05623709712119761741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-5248227407467282342008-01-31T16:08:00.000-05:002008-01-31T16:08:00.000-05:00There is that.I'm weirded out by the "I won't vote...There is that.<BR/>I'm weirded out by the "I won't vote for a woman" thing. I just don't get it. I've never understood nonsense like it. It may be that my home town had a woman mayor when I was a kid, so I'm just used to women in authority. (It's kind of like I've never known a Church w/out Women clergy - an all male clergy is weird to me and unfathomable.)<BR/><BR/>Inclusive or expansive language issues are very thorny, and I'm not sure if it can be fully discussed in this forum. I'm trying to do your meditation justice, but falling short in my explanation.Frair Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03855036304956508405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-83812204021591563142008-01-31T12:50:00.000-05:002008-01-31T12:50:00.000-05:00Friar John - Obviously, I'm voting for Hillary (ev...Friar John - Obviously, I'm voting for Hillary (even though I think Obama is a good candidate, his inexperience makes me a bit nervous), but this is not about that. This is about the effect of Hillary's candidacy in a time of war and uncertainty.Elizabeth Kaetonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06787552280232329081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-52401263328903718122008-01-31T12:33:00.000-05:002008-01-31T12:33:00.000-05:00What is also disturbing is the assumption taht the...What is also disturbing is the assumption taht the only reason to not vote for Sen Clinton is that she is a woman. I don't trust her for the same reasons why I distrust the rest of the "new left." Mouthing liberal and progressive ideals (when not denegrating the word "liberal" or using it as an ephethet) but voting to support the neo-con status quoe and being "on the team" that signed off on the Contract with America is aparently ballenced out by the fact that she is female.<BR/><BR/>We also all know the shining exampels of liberalism and progressive thought that were the Baroness Thatcher and Indera Gahndi.Frair Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03855036304956508405noreply@blogger.com