So how about saying parenting is or should be sacred -- in the sense of being among a culture's highest values.

Parenting should be more highly valued and rewarded in our culture.

Raising girls with no other goal other than that they will procreate is dehumanizing. (i don't even like the word "grooming," btw.)

But the people who experience it are still fully human. And parenting itself is not dehumanizing. On the contrary. For most people it is an experience that gets them more in touch with their humanity.

For others it is a nightmare. That is when we should all help.

Part of the reason it isn't as pleasant as it should be here in the west has nothing to do with how voluntary it is, but the fact that parents are left on their own without the support of extended family and community.

But the assumption that women who are parents involuntarily are necessarily living any lesser a life than you and i are is incredibly elitist. Do i think the world should change so that all women get to choose? Absolutely. But those who aren't given the choice in the sense that we mean here -- and that is probably most women on the planet -- are not by definition dehumanized by this. It's arrogant to assume so.

One of my best friends -- a man -- just called. He didn't really want to have kids, but his wife did. He chose to have children in the sense that he didn't absolutely refuse. Well as things turned out, his wife's career took off in a big way. Guess who became the primary caretaker? This has been the case for over 14 years now. This guy is a genius. He is highly educated. He is emotionally healthy. All he has done other than parent for these many years is teach part-time. That's a contribution. But i am sure some people might think all that IQ power and education have gone to waste. i do not. He does not. In fact, he has loved every minute of it. His kids, especially, do not.

I'm confused by this assertion. While I think that much of what we assume about the rest of the world can be and is effectually ignorant, I'm unclear on what looks like a contradiction in standards in the above remarks.

While a certain contingent holds that Western interference in, for example, the genital mutilation of girls taking place in certain African nations is misplaced and "elitist," I disagree. I believe that our global citizenship is more important than our ethnocentricities would have us believe, and that while we need always be mindful of other regions' cultures and perspectives, whenever and wherever a woman or girl is being harmed in the name of social ideology, I say down with that social ideology. But that's me, just one of the 'elite.'

Women and girls all over the world are harmed and, in fact, killed because of a lack of access to contraception, no access to safe and legal abortion, and forced social ideologies which impress upon them a standard which says 'no' to education but 'must' to childbirth as soon as their bodies are capable and until their bodies are no longer able. I do not and cannot see how this way of life is acceptable for any of my sisters. I'm just that arrogant.

I'm not sure about insisting- I don't insist that other people agree with me and to me there is a definite difference between faith, belief, dogmatism and the perversion of religious beliefs to control others.

It's part of my own belief system that all life is sacred. I have loved very dearly a few people who had extremely bad - criminally terrible, unfeeling, thoughtless - mothers. But they still gave life - by choice - to people I have loved very much and I do personally consider that a sacred act on their part.

I also think in a few of those cases, abortion or giving the kid up for adoption would have been the better choice. I recently lost somebody I loved very much. Witnessing the pain of his childhood was the best argument I ever encountered for abortion. When parents are incapable of loving their kids, of refraining from abusing them, of abstaining from cruelty toward them, of refraining from drinking or drugging through their pregnancies or parenting, then abortion may well be the kindest thing a person could do for their would-be child. But I still consider the act of bringing a person into this world to be a sacred act and a sacrifice on its own. I don't think it erases terrible behavior.

I know that's part of *my* belief system and I don't have any desire to force that belief onto anybody else. I just hate seeing that belief attacked here as it was earlier when somebody else posted about their own spiritual beliefs about and appreciation for motherhood.

I think it's really easy from the outside to be derisive or dismissive about other people's spiritual or religious beliefs, and I hate to see that happen within this thread or in this community.

Yes, there are dangers when people dogmatize a belief in the sacredness of life or motherhood and then use that to implement laws that oppress.

I think there are also dangers in treating life and motherhood as entirely unsacred things. I think doing so leads to some really horrific ideologies and practices (slavery, the Holocaust, genocide - incidentally all situations in which the forced "breeding" of women has happened).

ps. when I use the word "sacred" it is from a religious/spiritual place. There are other words that an atheist might be more comfortable using. I think there are atheists who very much see the value of life, who can certainly recognize the difference between birth and death, who can see and understand how much is given in the creation of another human being. "Sacred" may be a religious word, but I'm pretty sure there are atheists who value the lives, experiences, sacrifices and hard work involved in carrying and giving birth to a child and/or raising one.

Natalie,

Just as in my response to your private question, my post was not a direct response to your post, although my thinking did evolve from it, and as I said to you privately, I appreciated your thoughts very much on a personal level. There was nothing "derisive" or "dismissive" in my words here, nor my intent. I meant only to speak to the other side of what damages women in terms of how patriarchy has labeled us for sole use as "breeders," and that is to discuss the slippery slope we encounter with the sacred mother archetype. It's a lot to hang our hopes on.

I am not in the practice of dismissing peoples' religious or spiritual beliefs (I believe this is truly rude), only in examining the results our belief systems have on our thinking and our lives.

Julie

I'm one of the people who says that country/nation/people need to do it for themselves, and that it's not the west place to place our standards on any other country but our own..

Not as a cop out.. not because I don't hate what is happening to women/children around the world..

But simply because... The center doesn't hold.

When you try to force your way of thinking on a people who think another way.. It doesn't work.. Because you are going to have to police those people.. Make them live by your laws... Watch them... Make them dependent on someone else to enforce the laws..

It's only when the people of that country/nation/culture stand up for them selves and so.. HELL NO!!!!!! That true change in a positive way is possible... When people are ready and willing to die for that freedom, that change happens...

I come from a very long line of men abusing their women... It was a way of life.. No one thought twice about back handing their wife is she got smart with them...

My mom tells the story of the first time my dad went to swing at her.. She told him, that he had better kill her with that first blow, because she wasn't going to be hit and if that meant she had to kill him first, then that was alright with her.. (paraphrase)

My parents have been married 45 yrs in September and he has never laid a hand on her... Some of her sisters weren't so lucky.... Some of my cousins... But some were.. and from my mother generation, the cycle has been broken for them and their daughters... It spreads out like a wave...

I have never been hit by a lover, partner, or boyfriend... Because of my mother.. Because i say.. you better kill me.. because I'm NOT being hit.. It's something I am willing to die over...

In my mind it's always like an abused person... You can remove them, you can councile them, but until they are ready, change is not happening..

We can offer resorces, support, money.. But they have to do the work...

Random,

While I hear what you're saying, this essentially sounds like the Bootstraps argument to me. Sometimes, somebody ain't got no straps, you know what I'm saying? There has been a time that I was so down that not even my own legs would hold me.

Granted, it takes more than coming in and stopping the immediate threat to truly end a systemic problem like global reproductive rights issues. I certainly don't have the answers. The whole system of patriarchal influence needs to go, if you ask me (and clearly that's not a real-world plan for the time being).

People (women & girls especially) need help. They need to help each other.

I wonder why conversations about U.S. specific sexism and misogyny always/often turn into conversation about global sexism and misogyny and focusing on issues "over there".

I still contend that women/girls ARE *still* seen as baby makers, and I also still contend that they're groomed to be such the second they come out of the womb in this country...this one, right c'here.

I also still contend that this originally stems from thousands of years of religious tyranny, and that it is fully perpetuated in children's television/advertising/clothing options/etc.

I would also like to add that the Sacred Mother b.s. is what keeps many women covered in burqas and such (which many people on this site find offensive to women, yet some of those same people don't see how we do the same thing in this country to 'protect' our women).


Dylan...intrigued by many things today

P.S. If someone would please change the weather in Austin to something more pleasant, I would immediately get offline

I actually totaly agree with you...

Help, support, education is needed... But to use your analagy... they are your legs to support you.. no one else's will work for you.. Because in the end.. there is only you who can say what is worth the price that needs to be paid..

My response to your post was similar to your response to mine.

"my post was not a direct response to your post, although my thinking did evolve from it"

I quoted you and responded, but my response more evolved from yours than rebutted it.

I have tried very hard to be clear in both my posts what I do believe is sacred about creating life, while not slipping down the slippery slope you reference.

I may be a bit sensitive about this subject. The majority of my friends are highly intelligent atheists who like to pick everything apart - especially other people's religious beliefs - and I think it's an area where i'm experiencing some level of soreness/fatigue. The honoring of life, honoring the sacrifices involved with creating life, those things aren't so much of an intellectual-debate-type thing for me. So maybe I shouldn't have brought them up in this thread. (I do worship a mother goddess, for what it's worth).

Thanks for your thoughts, Julie. I really heart your brain. I was not intending to say *you* were being dismissive or derisive - more that I hoped things weren't going to go down that path. I'm sorry I wasn't more clear.

I'm sorry that you were raised in that way, Dylan. It's obviously affected your view on so many things.

My Mom said to me the day after my hysterectomy..."Well now I really know you won't have children". I was pretty stunned, considering she knew I was gay for at least 10 years at that point. No to mention *I* knew I did not and had never wanted children. However, she did not force her view upon me. I get the feeling, Dylan, that you believe thinking about your Daughters AND Sons having a family is a derogotory thing. That is somehow translates to the negative. I have to say, not always. I think it's quite natural for a parent to want the best for thier children. And if they think the white picket fence world is the best thing in the whole world, then that's what they wish for them! It doesn't have to be about patriarcle (blah blah blah however you spell that I'm sure the police will fix it) bullshit. My Father, for the record, stated "I just want her to be happy", when he finally came to terms with me being gay.

My 2 cents on that part.

As far as nasty words.....Oneida's list says it best. We ALL use derogitory terms at some point in our lives. And they certainly aren't meant to make friends! And yep, it shows our misgivings.

-Mr. Moon

Moon, I like ya' a lot, and I'm saying this with a lot of respect.

It bothers me that you've made assumptions about the way I was raised and that you've assumed you 'know where my views come from' based on a few sentences I've posted about my mother's Catholic-induced views.

Also, I have no idea how anything I've said in this thread or the other translates into wanting a family is bad. Seriously, if I have posted something in particular that would lead you to think that's what I'm saying, I truly apologize.

Of course (most) people want the best for their kids.

I sincerely have no idea how anything I've said has implied what I've highlighted above


Dylan

From what I read, that was my take home message.

I'm not gonna play the quote thing. Takes too much time for something that seems silly.

I meant no disrespect. The quote I quoted from you seemed clear to me.

I honestly thought you laid it out there. That's what I got from it.

Again, no disrespect meant, Dylan.
-Mr. Moon

i do too. And that's an extreme example of . . . of not what we are talking about.

Calling the parenthood of people who may not have had an option to be other than parents a form of harm is extremely ethnocentric and privileged.


And these are extreme cases. Not uncommon, but extreme. It is not how most women of the world feel about being parents. And to characterize their parenthood exclusively in these pathological terms is ethnocentric.

i just read a book called Three Cups of Tea about building schools in rural Pakistan. It's amazing how much those villagers -- the men of those villages -- want their daughters to be educated. Were there a few asshole mullahs saying it's wrong? Yes. There are places in the world where we only hear bad stories about -- places where miracles are happening.

WHo would have imagined thirty years ago the success that international development has had through investing in women's work -- the work of mothers who want money to educate their children. They are changing the world -- for all of us.

i can't resist. Dylan, this is SO second wave. ;)

While the discussion on whether or not Mother is Universally sacred is one that is worth having...can we get back to what the OP was about here?

Which is words that we use to hurt each other within the Queer Community and why.

At a recent local event I was asked why I married a "he-she". Who even says that within the contexts of Queer World anymore?
I was stunned into silence to be honest. Which I regret. Because that turned into me being so mad I could only cry and I hate being in that spot.

This phrase has been used a lot against women of color, particularly immigrant women and Latinas. i think it's worth thinking about that.

This is hallmark of postcolonial feminism, this disagreement with western feminists who think of having children as oppressive and dangerous and just ruinous to oneself and society. There are tons of articles about this. Or there were back in the day.

i think characterizing women who have children under circumstances different than we would choose as victims is offensive in the extreme, and it is often women of minority cultures within the U.S. or women of the developing world who get characterized this way.

My instructional assistant, a Latina, is pregnant. This is her third child. She can afford this child. She owns a house. Yadda yadda. When she was talking about what she thought the perfect sized family was -- four children -- my co-teacher, a single white man, rolled his eyes. i am so glad she didn't see.

My uncle, a rich white gay man from LA, and his partner talk alot about how immigrants and their (in their minds, too many) children have overwhelmed and destroyed the public institutions -- hospitals, schools, etc. -- of southern California. Part of their discourse is this totally insincere concern for the poor women who have to carry the burden of taking care of all those children. i like my uncle a lot, but this stuff is racist.

The use of the word we are discussing is often racist, at least here in California.

Sorry. Saw this after i posted. i could delete, i guess. But i am all invested in the post now. :|

LOL. No, by all means, don't delete. Now I'm invested as a Latina. I give.

I guess the kind of person in the Queer World, who would use "he-she" to refer to your spouse, is the same kind of person in the Non-Queer world, who would also use that phrase—someone who is insensitive, ignorant and/or fearful.

Good point. I suppose I am the kind of girl that hold us to a higher standard? I am just completely floored when somebody who has had to navigate the world as a Queer uses slurs against other Queers (or anyone for that matter). I know that is not a realistic world view, but I can't help it. It stings a bit more when it comes from another Queer.

i agree and i woke up wondering how all/any women (the ones here posting now) side-stepped the female-indoctrination in our society.

*and i had pretty "liberal" parents/was raised in southern california. i knew my 'place' and what was expected of me as *female*. also, i think people may *know* now the difference but it's one thing to learn some theory (as an adult), quite another thing to have experienced a pretty average childhood where you watched some tv, attended school (not home-schooled), went to a few friends' houses, had some religion or not--the media (even if you never watched TV) exposes you to society's expectations.

I know what you are talking about here, SuperFemme.

I was trying to explain to a friend who is a lesbian about my new boyfriend (a few years back) and what trans meant.

She exclaimed, "What? You mean they are a SHIM?!"

It was kinda devastating...and, even after I explained to her how that word is a slur, she never really apologized or tried to get it.

We don't talk anymore.

I would agree that the sacred mother as practiced by the God of Abraham monotheists is very harmful to girls and women. You must remember the sacred mother is a bastardization of the Goddess. The patriarchy's religion, in order to destroy the matriarchy's religion, stole my Sacred Mother and turned Her into a tool of the patriarchy.......mary, mother of jesus....

Human beings of any culture have every right and should vehemently stop the practice of mutilating girl's genitalia. Actually we have an OBLIGATION to stop this.

We also have an OBLIGATION to stop the sexual exploitation of children.....especially girls. The media in Western culture bears the greatest responsibility and obligation to do this.
----------------------

as to breeder........

I have always used it to denote those with children....that includes straight folk and queer folk. Sometimes it certainly has a 'dig' kind of quality to it. Sometimes it's just shorthand for those whose lives do revolve around children.

There is a huge difference between those of us whose lives do not revolve around children and those of us whose lives revolve around children.

-------------------

I do hear what is being said about slinging that word in a hateful way towards someone else. It is entirely inappropriate.

I don't think it's a good thing to sling any word at any human being with hate/meanness/derision behind that word.

I do have say as one who believes in 'question authority', this idea that I need to go read a thread about unacceptable words, so I know how to 'properly speak my mind' smacks of all kinds of censorship.

The numbers of words in any language that can be said with harm are unimaginable. We must be careful how we censor language. Censoring language can be a very slippery slope when it comes to offensive.

Hell my shrink thought is was offensive for me to call myself crazy...........laughin........she asked me not to do that because it offended her............laughin....you can just imagine how that conversation ended.

well some people are going to get it and some people aren't.

Toughy, nobody told anybody to go read a thread about unacceptable words, so you know how to 'properly speak your mind'.

What I did do was start a thread about hurtful language.

In the same vein of do unto others as you would do unto yourself....I am saying that the term breeders hurts me. I am not telling you not to use that word. I am not censoring it. I am telling you why it hurts me.

The choice to use it is yours.

My choice to address you as "She" is not censorship. It is mutual respect. Because that is how I roll, and that is how what you asked.

[QUOTE=Toughy;128860]I would agree that the sacred mother as practiced by the God of Abraham monotheists is very harmful to girls and women. You must remember the sacred mother is a bastardization of the Goddess. The patriarchy's religion, in order to destroy the matriarchy's religion, stole my Sacred Mother and turned Her into a tool of the patriarchy.......mary, mother of jesus....


Mary Mother Of Jesus is a very real and beautiful *Goddess* who has appeared to many many witnesses throughout time. She has performed many documented mind-blowing miracles, and is also known as The Holy Mother, The Queen of Peace, Queen Of Heaven, etc.

Just to be clear, "breeding" and one's life revolving around children are hardly synonymous. In fact, I think you just utilized a more repugnant use for the term.

In context, you equate the ability to get pregnant with actual parenting, which
1.) invalidates the parenting of non-birth children.
2.) makes the assumption that getting pregnant means choosing also to actively parent.

Neither is logical and I want to think that none of this is what you actually meant. Such is the way of language.

Quote:

Originally Posted by popcorninthesofa Mary Mother Of Jesus is a very real and beautiful *Goddess* who has appeared to thousands of witnesses throughout time as The Holy Mother, and The Queen of Peace.

Wow. Really?

This is just me ~ but coming from many years as an educator, I believe people call other people names in an attempt to make the recipients feel "less than", because the name~caller feels less than.....and in order to make themselves feel elevated somehow, or they're ignorant and/or just flat-out scared, they use the slurs....and this is true for any group of people, I feel.

There's a lot of insecurity out there.

And maybe ~ in regards to this particular thread ~ just MAYbe there is some deep-down desire to have a child. Just a SWAG there....

Just my 2 cents....

I'm using your post, Toughy, because it was the latest one about this subject. It's interesting to me that we stand united (myself included) about genital mutilation in girls, but we don't seem to be as horrified by foreskin removal in boy infants?

I vote genital mutilation thread because I would LOVE to see a discussion on this.

They don't. I've asked.:blink:

I agree. This isn't the place for this convo.

I wonder if I invoke Linus, if he will do his magic and create a new thread?

Goof tells me we have to watch "Monk" now. :glasses:

Female Genital Mutilation and Male Circumsion is not analogous--both in intent, cultural justifications, the physical procedure or the consequences. I am not proposing that male circumcision is without its issues or is immune from criticism. I just don't believe that the two procedures can be fairly compared.

Link:
FGM involves the cutting off of entire portions of the female anatomy. For boys, the removal of the foreskin is more about removing an “extra” piece of skin than removing a center of pleasure. Removing the clitoris, which occurs in many FGM rituals, is done to help ensure that girls do not derive any pleasure from their sexuality, thus encouraging them to remain pure. The male equivalent of FGM would be the removal of the tip of the penis up to and including the removal of the penis and scrotum.

ETA: I am not cool with the description of the *extra piece of skin" portion of the description; however, a clitoridectomy (and other parts that can be cut during FGM--the labia--as well as sewn up--vagina) just does not equate to the act of removing the foreskin of males.

i could attest to the same being true for un-circumcised females. i have the carpal tunnel syndrome to prove it.

My comment wasn't to compare the two as a hierarchy. Obviously, the female version is worse. Both are forms of mutilations, though. If we get another thread going, I hope you'll come in and continue this discussion.

Genital Mutilation Thread here! :)