Article on Unhappy Women in Patriarchal Churches

[Fluffy-Boo]

So is your "point" that societies will weaken and become unstable without religion to bind people together in a shared delusion (not referring to a particular one)? Where has that been the case in the modern world?

Yes, that is precisely my gorgeous point. Both historians and demographers alike are baffled by the power of religion (even truly evil religions) to unite and empower a civilization.

Religion isn't just about God, it is a politically unifying force. You could see the massive shaping effects of Christianity on Roman civilization under the rule of Constantine as clearly as you can see the driving force of evangelicals within the Conservative movement. Islam has currently trumped Christianity when it comes to political unification.

Religion binds people. And it has an exceptional effect on birthrates.

Demographers and sociologists are greatly concerned about the falling birthrates that are occurring within the MODERN super cool and educated WORLD. Yes, the world is reaching epic levels of bodies in densely populated areas, but this is NOT because of births, it is because the elderly people are living longer and enjoying health care benefits not afforded to prior generations.

This is a very important modern concern because a youthful working class is responsible for funding the tax dollars that pay for longevity programs.

Japan is one of the focal countries for this poor replacement syndrome. It's youth is suffering greatly.

America is still reaching it's replacement ratio, largely due to the poor working class and Christianity, but also largely due to immigration. However, you are already seeing the effects of this syndrome in states like California where the ratio of taxpayers to non-taxpayers is imbalanced.

Religion can be as damaging to the individual as it can "heal", but from a population perspective, it appears to be protective. Sadly, I would not want any individual to convert to any philosophy that is not true and factual. But why it is necessary for a civilization to endure philosophical and theological errors in order to survive is...fascinating?

[Fluffy-Boo]

The non-religious, pro-evolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator.

I completely agree with this. Problem is, societies like this don't last in the face of fanatics. Tolerance does not offer the same evolutionary protection as the intolerance of religion.

This is why TIME reported in 2011 that the happiest countries like those in Scandinavia, also have the highest suicide rates:

http://healthland.time.com/2011/04/25/w ... ide-rates/

It would appear that some people don't even want to live long enough to enjoy their low crime rates.

[Austin]

You would be hard-pressed to find an atheist who asserts with certainty that a god does not exist (yes, I'm sure there are some). And if you don't believe in a god (note that that is NOT the same as believing that there isn't a god), I've got some bad news for you...

I know numerous atheists, both IRL and online, who assert that there is no god. They don't generally qualify it with the percentage of certainty they feel about that, so it's hard to say, but yeah, a lot of them seem pretty sure. Which is not a bad thing, btw; it just requires more certitude than I am personally comfortable with. If they weren't pretty certain, they would identify as agnostic, not atheist.

So what's the bad news if I don't believe in a god, Lainey?

[Lainey]

I know numerous atheists, both IRL and online, who assert that there is no god. They don't generally qualify it with the percentage of certainty they feel about that, so it's hard to say, but yeah, a lot of them seem pretty sure. Which is not a bad thing, btw; it just requires more certitude than I am personally comfortable with. If they weren't pretty certain, they would identify as agnostic, not atheist.

So what's the bad news if I don't believe in a god, Lainey?

That you are an atheist (ETA--If you don't believe in a god. I don't know whether you do or not). You can be an agnostic and an atheist. I am. One is about belief, and one is about knowledge. ;)

[Austin]

That you are an atheist (ETA--If you don't believe in a god. I don't know whether you do or not). You can be an agnostic and an atheist. I am. One is about belief, and one is about knowledge. ;)

Well, I don't know why I would consider that the "bad news", if it was true. It's just simply not the case. Just because you are something, or it's possible to be something, does not mean that I am that same thing. I am an agnostic in the truest sense. I just simply have no idea. I think there's as good a possibility that there is a god as there isn't.

[meda]

And on another note, because I'm in my bitchy place today: Can we all stop pretending Lewis is just some totally cool poster here on FJ? He's a creep and a weirdo with rants all over the goddamned internet about how wronged he was by his ex girlfriend and her daddy. Ugh.

Thank you, I was roundly criticized for being insensitive the last time I pointed that out.

[Austin]

Did Lewis post in this topic? I can't find it. . .

[Lainey]

Thank you, I was roundly criticized for being insensitive the last time I pointed that out.

I am sorry. People do seem to fawn over him when he's brought up. I don't get it. I'm with you.

[Austin]

Ah, nevermind. I see that MJB referred to him.

[meda]

Did Lewis post in this topic? I can't find it. . .

MJB linked to one of his blog posts on the first page of the thread.

Edit because Austin is smarter than my iPad and found it already

[Lainey]

Well, I don't know why I would consider that the "bad news", if it was true. It's just simply not the case. Just because you are something, or it's possible to be something, does not mean that I am that same thing. I am an agnostic in the truest sense. I just simply have no idea. I think there's as good a possibility that there is a god as there isn't.

Okay, but words have meanings. Atheist means "without god." You can call yourself whatever you like; I'm just sayin'. I found this helpful to me when I read this way of looking at it. Very many people are hesitant to call themselves "atheists," even when they are, because it unfortunately carries a negative connotation. I don't think it should.

[Austin]

I don't find the word "atheist" to have a negative connotation, and if I was an atheist, I'd say so. I'd actually rather be, as my viewpoint requires an uncomfortable amount of uncertainty.

I think I have a pretty good idea of what my beliefs actually are.

[Soldier of the One]

I don't think the word atheist has a negative connotation. It just means 'no god'. Pretty self-evident to me :)

[Austin]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonab ... -religion/

Make a cup of tea before you click that link. It's a huuuuge graphic.

I saved that graphic after the first time I saw it - thanks for reminding me of it.

[Fluffy-Boo]

I don't think the word atheist has a negative connotation. It just means 'no god'. Pretty self-evident to me :)

Yup, as atheism gains more forum, a more lucid distinction is being drawn between atheism and anti-theism.

[Soldier of the One]

Yup, as atheism gains more forum, a more lucid distinction is being drawn between atheism and anti-theism.

Yeah, I think that's a pretty crucial distinction. Most of my atheist friends are 'meh' on my Imaginary Friend in the Sky. Theoretically, I don't have a problem with anti-theists either but in practice, they tend to be a little too annoying, even for me 8-)

[emmiedahl]

I am religious and I have a hard time with the oppressive elements of religion. I will be totally upfront and frank about being disturbed about many things written in the Torah and thinking, "God chose THESE creeps to reveal himself to? Really?"

Most aspects of human society have misogyny, oppression and evil of all kinds at its core; we need to recognize it and pull it out at the roots wherever the noxious weeds are found. I guess I see personal faith as a lovely plant that will take over if you let it. Not a weed per se, but you need to keep it in check. And religion has also been an impetus for positive change, although on a much smaller scale than the negative. I don't belief that religion strengthens a community (although it can rally them to be assholes, to be sure, because it makes an "other" of outsiders) but I believe it can strengthen individuals.

I sound like I am justifying, and I guess I am doing so. Ultimately, I cannot stop believing in God, I just do, and I also feel a strong affinity toward Judaism on a cultural level. Hence my religious choices. When I see a conflict between God and Good, I assume it was placed there by man because the two should not contradict. I choose the Good and assume God is on my side. It sounds crazy and I know a lot of atheists are rolling their eyes. But I just believe. I just do. I don't expect anyone to understand because I don't understand either.

[QAF_Rocks]

I'm currently reading a book by Alain de Botton called 'Religion for Atheists' - some of you might find it interesting: a lot of the arguments here are arguments he makes too.

I was going to read his book, but after going through some of the reviews, concluded that it would only make me want to hurl it across the room. I don't want atheism to mimic organized religion. In fact, I think that's one of the main problems with the atheist movement in the United States, that there seems to be a concerted effort to make atheism into a sort of identity. I don't think that atheism should the basis or foundation for community. I think community should be the basis for community. I don't want to see atheist activities or groups ape religious ones. I don't believe we need to replace religion with something else. I think we need to dismantle the whole system and disentangle ourselves from the whole expectation of faith communities and American church-going culture. If anything, we should be looking at what other secular societies are doing and take tips from them.

[aelar]

But how can a purely personal/individual religion have the community aspect that many people of faith find so important? In any case, how my faith's history (good and bad) have shaped it is really important to me, and starting from scratch would get rid of all that.

Sorry for the delayed response, I know the conversation has moved on, but I had this mostly typed up before I had to run out the door to work, so I'll go ahead and post it.

Obviously we are all informed by our experiences, including religion, and none of us can start completely from scratch, since the very language that we use and the symbols that have meaning for us come with their own histories. I try to free myself as much as possible from the past, and do a lot of work specifically on finding things that are new and uniquely meaningful (like developing my own archetypes rather than looking to mythology or Jung, just as one example), but I fall back on traditional symbolism sometimes because that is what I know and what speaks to me. So there's no reason in my mind, for someone attached to certain customs or beliefs in an otherwise problematic religion not to pull out those pieces that speak to them, reinterpret them if needed, and throw the rest away.

The key to me is really doing that work of examining the belief or custom, and making sure that it truly is representing values you agree with, and if not, consciously changing it until it does. Another example, I like the way veils look, but there is this idea that veils are tied into the patriarchy, representing the idea that women are anonymous and replaceable in the marriage rite. So for my wedding, I did some research, and thinking, and felt attracted to the idea of weddings as being liminal space, a time in between, where there is danger. The whole bridesmaids dressing alike thing used to be related to this, all the girls were supposed to dress like the bride, to confuse any evil spirits that might want to attack the bride while she was vulnerable. I don't believe that spirits exist, but I do think that getting married is a really scary, life changing, wonderful but dangerous thing. So it made sense to me to symbolically shield myself from the dangers by having my husband pull down my veil (as I wrapped a protective bracelet around his wrist). People making up their own religion can still 'have nice things' and those things have more meaning, in my opinion, because they were consciously chosen, without the rest of the baggage.

As far as community, which is certainly the biggest problem with personal religion, there are still lots of ways to find a group to belong to and celebrate ritual with. As someone else has mentioned, you can find community in places outside of religion, like a neighborhood or activist group, or perhaps one related to your ethnic background, but secular. You can practice your own religion, but become part of a spiritual community, like a UU church, that doesn't require people to all believe in the same things, and provides a support system for connecting with people who might share similar views in some areas, even if all your beliefs aren't in alignment.

You can also share your religion with your friends and families in ways that let them help celebrate and enjoy your rituals together, without having to all sign up to believe the same thing (there are techniques for writing liturgy that use open language that lets people interpret how they wish, rather than expressing a definitive belief system). In essence building a ritual life around inter-faith ceremonies.

I practice in sort of rings, where I have:

-- some rituals that all kinds of people play a part in without knowing it

-- some rituals that I keep light hearted that friends and family can experience as a ritual if they want to, or just as a fun celebration

-- some rituals that I shape very distinctly as rituals, but where I use open symbolism and language, and invite people to come and experience and bring their own spirituality into

-- a few intense and personal rituals that I participate in alone, or with my husband or closest friends who share, if not my exact beliefs, then something close enough that our rituals work in all our personal religions.

Anyway, I know most people just dismiss the idea of making up your own religion completely for a lot of reasons. I just like to point out that it is possible to do, and to build a rich and meaningful spiritual life that way. I've been practicing most of my rituals for a decade or more, my friends look forward to my 'made up' holidays more than some of the ones you find on the calendar, and now I have a daughter that I will be sharing my ritual life with, and helping her to create her own belief system.

It's sort of the radical opposite of fundamentalism, and so probably unappealing to most people just because it's so extreme, but the basic idea that it's OK to pick and choose your beliefs and rituals and practices, and it doesn't make you a bad person or mean that you'll have an unfulfilling life, would save all these people we see suffering under the weight of their toxic belief systems a lot of grief.

[QAF_Rocks]

I also think some people are 'wired' to be religious while others are not. This is one of many reasons why I don't actually care whether someone believes or doesn't believe. I don't necessarily thing that faith is for everyone or helpful to everyone. Seen more than my share of well-balanced, loving, decent and happy atheists to attest to that. And seen an equal number of religious folk with the same descriptors.

I think there has been some scientific research backing that up, that perhaps some people are born predisposed to religion. On the other hand, I don't believe the number of such people in society constitutes the majority. Otherwise, you wouldn't see such dramatic differences in levels of religiosity from country to country. There are countries where only a small minority believe in a personal god or an afterlife, so culture obviously has a lot to do with it.

[MamaJunebug]

MamaJuneBug, that's interesting. So do you consider yourself an egalitarian who submits to a mildly non-egalitarian religious setting because of community and theological integrity? A.k.a. would you yourself like to see women in the pastorate?

I see what you mean but for me, my theology is part and parcel of my social views. For me it isn't 'just God' and the rest are extras. For me, gender and sexual equality, social egalitarianism, solidarity and human rights are part and parcel of Divine Revelation and the voice of our Prophets. Is this at tension with some of the more patriarchal tendencies of Judaism? Absolutely. But that tension exists whether I am part of it or not. That tension has existed since the times of Abraham and Sarah, Moses and Miriam, Deborah and Barak, Hoseah and Ezekiel. Modern society has just given me the tools to articulate and develop what *I* consider to be the Divine Will - a society that arches towards Redemption and full inclusion of all its members.

Yes, I read and interpret the Divine Will (as expressed through our textual tradition) through my own agenda. But don't we all? Non-egalitarian or patriarchal Judaism also read those texts and those processes of religious jurisprudence through their own agenda. To each their own. I'd just want to belong to a community that espouses those values because those values are intrinsic to my theology.

All the best! :)

Soldier of the One, all my best back to you and great questions! I tried to answer them yesterday but my TSU's connection was really really slow.

I want to start by responding to your own beliefs, in the latter couple paragraphs of your post -- you've got the most balanced attitude I've ever read about. Absolutely, every one who reads a holy scripture is going to take away a very individualized interpretation of the words. The best theologians would have to admit that none of them sees things exactly the way another one does. I admire and envy you because you seem to be able to live your outward and inward lives in concert, that is, you don't give any appearance of supporting what you really don't support.

As for me, I'm an egalitarian. I would love it if all religions which now don't, gave women and men equality and stopped calling homosexuality a sinful lifestyle choice, stopped saying that it's god's will that men be in charge because they're bigger and have more physical force to exert.

Harder question: why do I 'submit'. You, very perceptively, have hit both answers: yes, community; and yes, theological integrity as far as Lutheranism being Christ-centered.

I know that belonging to the congregation I do tacitly indicates my approval of everything it stands for. Some would call me phony because of that and they'd be right: I'm a genuine phony, I admit that I'm not consistent and that I send mixed messages with everything I do.

What I love about my congregation is that 99.9% of the time, the messages we hear are those of full forgiveness. And part of the reason I stay is because what's left of my family of origin are there, as well. None of us are happy when the pastor does his 0.1% and rants.

Were i to find another congregation of a sensible (liberal) bent that preached the forgiveness as forcefully and with as much assurance as does this Lutheran pastor, i would probably think very seriously about joining it. So far that hasn't been the case.

So...yes, I'm well aware that my membership sends the message of my tacit approval of even the wrong (IMHO) parts of our teachings. I can only say that anybody who talks to me soon finds out that reality is not perception, as when I declared to the church secretary and a board member that I'm certainly a feminist and can't imagine that they aren't. ;) We're still friends, btw.

Thank you again for your post and your questions and especialy for your excellent POV.

[Soldier of the One]

Soldier of the One, all my best back to you and great questions! I tried to answer them yesterday but my TSU's connection was really really slow.

I want to start by responding to your own beliefs, in the latter couple paragraphs of your post -- you've got the most balanced attitude I've ever read about. Absolutely, every one who reads a holy scripture is going to take away a very individualized interpretation of the words. The best theologians would have to admit that none of them sees things exactly the way another one does. I admire and envy you because you seem to be able to live your outward and inward lives in concert, that is, you don't give any appearance of supporting what you really don't support.

As for me, I'm an egalitarian. I would love it if all religions which now don't, gave women and men equality and stopped calling homosexuality a sinful lifestyle choice, stopped saying that it's god's will that men be in charge because they're bigger and have more physical force to exert.

Harder question: why do I 'submit'. You, very perceptively, have hit both answers: yes, community; and yes, theological integrity as far as Lutheranism being Christ-centered.

I know that belonging to the congregation I do tacitly indicates my approval of everything it stands for. Some would call me phony because of that and they'd be right: I'm a genuine phony, I admit that I'm not consistent and that I send mixed messages with everything I do.

What I love about my congregation is that 99.9% of the time, the messages we hear are those of full forgiveness. And part of the reason I stay is because what's left of my family of origin are there, as well. None of us are happy when the pastor does his 0.1% and rants.

Were i to find another congregation of a sensible (liberal) bent that preached the forgiveness as forcefully and with as much assurance as does this Lutheran pastor, i would probably think very seriously about joining it. So far that hasn't been the case.

So...yes, I'm well aware that my membership sends the message of my tacit approval of even the wrong (IMHO) parts of our teachings. I can only say that anybody who talks to me soon finds out that reality is not perception, as when I declared to the church secretary and a board member that I'm certainly a feminist and can't imagine that they aren't. ;) We're still friends, btw.

Thank you again for your post and your questions and especialy for your excellent POV.

Hi Mamajunebug,

Thank you for your sweet words :) I worry a bit how I come across on FJ sometimes because a) I don't share much of my personal life, b) I don't snark and c) I talk theology. A lot. It must make me look like a pompous ass from time to time :lol:

Never mind, I come here because I love the discussions and the community and the diversity I find here. I love that there are people with all sorts of viewpoints, it's really great :)

I really understand where you're coming from and I have wrestled with the same issue. For a long time I was Orthoprax and 'defended' such patriarchal Halachic (Jewish legal) decisions because of my striving to be theologically consistent. I realized that I just couldn't forsake in my heart of hearts what I believed to be true. This DOES put me at odds with certain interpretative traditions within Judaism, but so be it. I need to be a 'whole person' as much as I can be. I bring my brokenness to God, not to Man.

It certainly isn't easy, but faith isn't - nor is it supposed to be, I don't think. I cannot and will not speak on behalf of others but that is how it feels to be. Religion should be comforting but not comfortable. We are called to wrestle with it and I think that is the truest kind of faith :)

I hope you find your community one day, where you can be truly 'whole' :)

[MamaJunebug]

"Religion should be comforting but not comfortable" -- something to ponder!!

I love FJ in large part *because* there's room for all kinds of people, ideas and outlooks.