Six months or so ago the BBC showed a three-part series by Diarmaid MacCulloch, called How God Made The English. In this series, according to the short blurb on the Beeb website, MacCulloch, "explore[d] both what it means to be English and what has shaped English identity, from the Dark Ages, through the Reformation to modern times." Which is a rather wide-sounding description of what seemed to me to be a rather narrower perspective. Having watched it, I'd say it would be better described as a history of the English Church, and latterly the Church of England, and its impact on, and interactions with, English society and government.
Posts Tagged ‘sexism’
Though they're His words, not ours, and never in doubt,
Somehow a woman's voice makes them less devout.
When we, from the pulpit, His wishes proclaim,
They mean less when uttered by Jane than by James.
The word of God—though always true—
If spoke by a woman, has less value.
So our gobbledegook should be spoken by Man,
For he bullshits much better than Woman ever can.
I don't want to make too big a thing of this, but could we watch our language in the comments? I’m no prude, and have no objection to swearing, but some words are a bit of a no-no.
Personally, I'm not certain that 'cunt' is sexist, given that I can, offhand, think of many more insulting uses of the various parts of the male genitalia than the female. I am aware, however, that very many people disagree with me on that one, and there's plenty of other insults available; it costs no effort to use a replacement. 'Bitch,' most certainly is sexist.
I'm not making a huge thing of it, and I'm certainly not going to start banning folks left right and centre or anything like that, especially when it's virtually always an unthinking slip rather than deliberate sexism (which is actually part of the problem). I'd just prefer, on a personal level, not to see it here.
You would't say 'darky' or 'nig-nog,' yet both terms were often defended because 'no harm was meant.'
Thanks in advance
Let's just suppose, for a minute, that the existence of a god were somehow proved. We'll skip lightly over the ensuing religious debates, riots and wars centred around just which version of which god it actually is, and turn to the more important (to me) question of just how it would affect my life and how I live it.
Quite simply, it wouldn't. Oh, superficially it would; after all, I've no doubt that I'd have to put up with even more constant evangelising from all sorts of religious sects, which couldn't help but have an impact on all our lives. The important parts of my life, that religious people of all stripes claim that religion improves—my moral and ethical thinking, and so forth—wouldn't be affected at all, though.
Quite simply, the only god I can envisage as being worthy of my respect would be one who didn't demand it. Any being, whether human or god, who demands that I kowtow, merely because it's more powerful than I am is a petty-minded, vanity-driven bully. Any god worthy of my respect wouldn't care a jot whether I worship it or even believe in its existence. It would judge me, if it were a judging kind of god, on my actions. Like Santa, it would know if I'd been bad or good.
I’ve just read this series of posts, on the general subject of why all us nasty atheists should shut up and leave the religionists alone. Well, to be fair, only three of them are; the first one makes a pretty good analogy for religionists’ attempts to bring the disbeliever back to the church, though there’s a sentence in the final paragraph that seems a tad dodgy to me:
But somehow, despite the fact that I view both Santa and God as man-made, myth passed down by word-of-mouth to a select population, I perpetuate both of these existences as equally true in order to allow my children to discover the truth on their own.
It might just be faulty phrasing, but if we take that at face value, the author is telling her children that God exists, just as she’s telling them that Santa exists. Problem is though, they’ll find out eventually that Santa isn’t real without any help from her. Whether the same can be said of any belief they have in God is a tad more problematic, as it’s not considered crazy for an adult to do so, and there’s a lot less likelihood of them eventually getting straightened out on the point. If you want evidence, just look at the number of people in the world willing to believe in invisible sky-daddies compared to the number willing to believe in Santa.
That’s not the main point though, and the author quickly moves on to berating the ebil atheists in Ye Second Parte…
Apparently, it’s Blasphemy Day. It almost passed me by! It’s gone 10:30 PM here in the UK as I write this, but heigh-ho; out there in Internetland there’s still places that have most of the day left to enjoy taking the names of various gods in vain.
Problem is I’m not feeling very imaginative, so I’ll just start ranting and see where it takes me…
And Again, And Again, And Again…
I’d been thinking of doing something like this for a while, and, as Nat over at Forty Shades Of Grey recently accused me of reading her mind by making all her points before she could, I thought I’d turn the tables and do it just after she just had, thus showing that it seems to be a two-way street. And—imitation being the best form of flattery—I reorganised my sketchy notes on it and nicked her ordering and headings, too. 🙂
It concerns, if you didn’t click the link, the arguments from the opposition that we see over and over again. While some are actually meant seriously, the vast majority of times you see them, they’re from trolls; people who aren’t actually trying to make a serious case rather than just muddy the waters.
Of course, Nat did it from a feminist perspective, where I’ve gone for the gnu-atheist perspective, so there’s bound to be some differences. Indeed, if there were none, I’d have just linked to her article. As it is, the two are similar enough to lead one to the conclusion that a conservative troll of little imagination is still a conservative troll of little imagination, no matter their specific area of conservatism, whilst being dissimilar enough for me to add something new.
[Added at the last minute. Talking of Forty Shades Of Grey, Facebook users really need to read Nat’s latest post. Words fail me, they really do. On the lighter side, I have a substitute YouTube link.]
Right then, let’s be about it…