Which offends religious people the most?
This is a toughie. Why don’t we look at the faux controversy coming from Dartmouth College. Mayuka Kowaguchi created “The Orchid Project” for her sexual health peer-advising group on campus. What was this horrifying project? Small hand mirrors were distributed to women on campus, with an accompanying note describing female anatomy and the statement that the project was “to shift [women’s] perspective from the expectations and limitations of belief patterns, societal cultural or religious conditioning.”
If these mirrors were truly meant to encourage the consideration of issues surrounding body-awareness, then, I believe, those who consider themselves to be members of Dartmouth communities of faith — which do not support acting on this knowledge in a sexual fashion — would not have been offended.
[…]This is one of many occasions where I have found the liberal body at Dartmouth to completely violate those principles that it purports to advance: respect and freedom. Regardless of the offensiveness of the message, if the Orchid Project’s main goal was to encourage consideration, what possessed them of the idea that a direct attack on all faiths was the way to do that?
[…]The body of believers at Dartmouth and the body of non-believers would often mutually benefit from sitting down and “considering” the issues surrounding sexuality. Respectful discussion will only bred further respect and discussion, but blatant attacks on an entire outlook on life, will only bred further animosity, ignorance and offense.”
Oh boo hoo! Someone dared to suggest that my religious beliefs are wrong! Don’t they know that criticizing belief patterns and societal culture are okay, but irrational religious beliefs are untouchable? Who missed the political correctness memo?! Help, help, I’m being oppressed!
I can’t even conceive how someone can read that initial statement to mean that all religious beliefs are completely wrong, unless they’re trying to play the victim. And then turn around and presume to speak for every religious person at Dartmouth. And then go and condemn “acting on this knowledge in a sexual fashion,” thus proving the initial point that some religious beliefs can lead to sex-negative beliefs.
If you think a simple suggestion that you’re incorrect is a “blatant attack,” then what the hell is “respectful discussion”? Bashfully going “Shucks, whatever you want to believe must be right! I sure won’t ever present a viewpoint that disagrees with you! Because your beliefs cannot be criticized, even if it means my beliefs must be silenced”?
Fuck that. I’ll respect your beliefs once they’re deserving of respect – that is to say, when they’re not based on some ancient book about a invisible sky daddy and his zombie self-child that was scribbled together by some misogynistic dudes in a desert – or whatever particular illogical mythology you prefer to subscribe to. Feel free to keep believing, but don’t assume that gives you immunity from criticism. Pleasantries and political correctness only allows insane ideas to flourish.
Why are so many people starting to criticize Christianity? It’s not a mass conspiracy – it’s because you’re wrong.
So back to my original question: I guess that’s a vote for “criticising religion.” Meh, I’ll go look at my own vagina too, just in case.
(Via Jezebel)
I’ll respect your beliefs once they’re deserving of respectI’m glad some-one else is saying that! I am sick and tired of this ridiculous idea that people deserve respect; respect has to be earned, damnit! Tolerance, basic politeness maybe, those are the things one can consider oneself entitled to by virtue of being alive, but respect goes far beyond that, and if it is to mean something it cannot be given out for free, particularly to the promoters of our modern Cacocracy.
Come on Christians… show some ovaries and look at your vagina.
Wow. So many fallacies, where to start. Since when is the suggestion that examining religious conditioning is an attack on ALL religions? Really, it’s only an attack on those religions with fucked up relationships with vaginas. So, for instance, I very much doubt you’ll find any Unitarians, Reform Jews, liberal mainline protestants, etc. finding this remotely offensive. It’s only offensive if you’re on the fanatically misogynistic end of the religious spectrum. Having been raised by such folks myself, I’d be very surprised if any of the fundamentalist Christian women who feel social pressure to protest the mirrors aren’t secretly pleased to have them and aren’t the ones actually using them.
Also hilarious about this project are the people who got upset about having “obscene” images forced upon them in their mailbox. The diagram of the vagina was basically anatomy textbook style. Yeah…that’s way more obscene than college students should be able to handle >.>Dartmouth has some super sexually repressed people, which is probably where the whole basis of this controversy. After all, female sexuality is totally horrifying – soon we might start having sex for the pleasure of it *gasp*~A Dartmouth grad student who sadly did not get one of these mirrors :(
Can we say Vagina Quake?
gee, i guess i’m going to have to reach out to my friend who teaches at D. in both cases, that was some of the worst writing i’ve seen in a while. a simple “have you looked at your vagina lately? if not, why not? we’d like you to think about that” would’ve sufficed. i won’t even bother with whiny xtian’s deplorable prose. i pity students today, i really do. i’m not the best writer in the world, but wow. it’s getting more and more clear that kids are being completely shafted in high school. it’s painful for me to read a lot of the internet communities where lots of under-25 folks hang out. i’m sorry kids; the older generation has screwed you out of a real education.
What a bunch of whiny hoo-hoos.
I had to read the initial statement three or four times before I could even work out which part could possibly cause religious people offense. At first I thought it was the fact that they dared to mention lady parts in a context that had nothing to do with having babies, but apparently the fact that they used the word “religion” was enough to get their knickers in a twist.
Since when is bodily awareness in women offensive? Oh yea, to certain groups of people it always will be.
“political correctness” You keep using this, and as a pro-PC person, maybe it’s just me but I wouldn’t say it applies here. To me, PC is about treating marginalized groups with respect. People of color, LGBT people, etc. Straight, white, religious people don’t need something like political correctness to dissuade people from offending them, because everything about our society is about protecting those people from offense. There’s a bit more to it than that, but that’s the abridged version.
How does D’Arcy justify calling this an attack on religion? This was an attack on any institution that tries to repress sexuality. Religion just happens to be one of those institutions. It is not an attack, it is a statement of fact. D’Arcy needs to ask herself one question, “Is religion ever responsible for fostering sexual repression?” She is entitled to her own opinion, of course. But a more appropriate response would be to send a message to women of faith, reaffirming their beliefs. Maybe something like this:Women of faith,In these modern times, sin and corruption are everywhere. But in no other place can such a concentration be found as in your vagina. Some servants of Satan will try to tell you that your vagina is good, but they are wrong. God has given you a vagina as a test. Please resist temptation and keep it hidden, even from yourself. In God’s great plan, the vagina is necessary for reproduction, but women of faith should certainly not enjoy having one.Please, I implore you. Do not look at your vagina!Ok, so maybe playing the victim is the better choice.
Women of Earth! God hates your vaginas! He regrets that He made such a flawed, vile, sinful, evil creation! And He is sorry He gave them to you. Except that would imply that He was wrong to give them to you. Which is impossible. Because God is perfect. And deemed his creation Good. And… Dammit!
I love your ability to make amazing points while also making me laugh. Great post!
This post reminds me of this Halloween party we had at work. One guest said he’d considered dressing up as Jesus Christ but wasn’t sure it would offend anyone so decided against it. I had to chime in with a “So fucking what if anyone’s offended? You know what’s offensive? Self-proclaimed moral authorities who demand women be treated like garbage, claim ownership on who we are and are not permitted to love or fuck, rape and/or scare the living shit out of children and all this while taking advantage of tax privileges, you know, so they can keep the human race ignorant, delusional nitwits…because their non-existent, masochistic ass hat of a space daddy told them it was the way it is. Oh, and doing these things gets ya into eternal paradise.”The guy didn’t have a response to my statement. Weird.
Score! Who knew looking at vaginas pissed off the wacky religious so much? If it’ll rub some sanctimonious twat the wrong way I’ll look at lady-bits all day!Though as a gay man it’ll be an unpleasant day. But I suppose I’m willing to take that hit to…HEY! Dammit religious people, stop trying to trick me into spite looking at lady bits. If I’ve told you once, I’ve told you a million times. It’s not for me.
Maybe we can find common ground with the religious by combining these activities?Oh, right. We’ll criticize religion while looking at vaginas. They’ll just criticize vaginas. >.>
Not only is this anti-religious, it is also sexist. Why aren’t we giving magnifying glasses to men so they can examine their own penises! If these mirrors were truly meant to encourage the consideration of issues surrounding body-awareness, then, I believe, those who consider themselves to be members of Dartmouth communities of heterosexual prudish men — which do not support women acting on any knowledge in a sexual fashion, or otherwise — would not have been offended.This is one of many occasions where I have found the liberal body at Dartmouth to completely violate those principles that it purports to advance: respect and freedom. The idea that women can look at their anatomy like men do regularly is just offensive, and obviously they should have thought about that. Regardless of the offensiveness of the message, if the Orchid Project’s main goal was to encourage consideration, what possessed them of the idea that a direct attack on all men’s unique anatomy was the way to do that?The body of penises at Dartmouth and the body of women who don’t know their place would often mutually benefit from sitting down and “considering” the issues surrounding sexuality. Respectful discussion will only bred further respect and discussion, but blatant attacks on an entire outlook on life, will only bred further animosity, ignorance and offense.(yes, the above is sarcasm.)
“Vagquake 2010”
“I’ll go look at my own vagina too”lemme know if you need a second set of eyes…..
I agree with you 100% about giving respect when views are worthy of respect. And yes, no one is immune to criticism. The entire “controversy” is messed up and I feel sorry for the people who have to endure such an environment.
D’Arcy’s view is a fascinating expression of Christian privilege. Mention of religion was taken to be an attack on her religion, which she then took to be representative of all “communities of faith.” But would she also say the phrase earlier in the offending sentence, “belief patterns,” is disparaging of all belief patterns? Or “societal” was intended to be a condemnation of all social organization? In order to make her claim, D’Arcy presumes that this is an attack on her beliefs. She generalizes her own beliefs to be all communities of faith. This is the essence of Christian privilege.
I’m not sure why there’s any surprise here. Religionists *never* like people to take out their assumptions and reexamine them. Questioning your base assumptions lead you to all sorts of mischief, like freethinking, skepticism, and atheism.Can’t be having *that*. Might interfere with income from the collection plate…
In the second paragraph after the block quote you say:”all religious believes are completely”When you mean “beliefs”.
Oh pants. Now I’ve got your title mentally crossed with the Old Spice Ad. This is going to haunt me the whole dang day.”What’s in your hand?; back to me; I have it. It’s a hand mirror for reflecting on perception and conditioning. Back to your hand; back to me; the reflection is now knowledge!”
Oh come on now – surely you realize that urging people to shift perspective from the expectations and limitations of belief patterns or religious conditioning is a blatant attack on the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. If people can’t hang on to their belief patterns or religious conditioning without any questioning or doubt or shifting of perspective whatsoever, then they don’t have free exercise, and we’re all doomed, doomed I tell you!
Really?
The best bit of that was the people in the comments who were speculating that there would be some great uproar if a Christian group had sent out crosses to everyone’s mailbox with a note about resisting sexual promiscuity, or something. Because Christians NEVER, EVER try to force their beliefs on others, amirite? Hands up who’d be SHOCKED if they got religious propaganda in the mail. Nobody? Hm.
So the main reason this person was offended (by my reading) is that they assumed the mirrors were being handed out so women could look at their vaginas in a sexual fashion? It’s hard to tell ’cause the rant is poorly written –too many parentheticals — (:P)Can a theist talk about anything without projecting?
Vag-gate?oh the puns….Great post! First time reader – will be back! :)
If we do have a VagQuake, I’m going to have a hard time explaining to my husband why I posted photos of my cooter on my blog. I wonder if it would be more offensive to the extremists if I left it au natural as God intended, or did it up fancy-like with home-made Vajazzles?
This was, by far, the best response I’ve read to this ridiculous “controversy,” especially coming from a feminist perspective. Other responses have been way too concerned with not stepping on toes and offending the more sex-positive believers, but in this case, by doing so they’re pretty much missing the point entirely.
How did looking at your vagina turn out? Still going with “criticizing religion?”
Really, it’s only an attack on those religions with fucked up relationships with vaginas.It’s not even that. To simply ask that someone consider their religious beliefs and how such beliefs inform their relationship to their own body can not, in any reasonable use of the word, be considered an attack of any kind. The ‘attack’ is pure persecution complex, in the minds only of Ms. D’arcy and those that think like her.To such people there really are, to use an old phrase, Reds under every bed. They will see what they want to see, irrespective of what is really there, or not there.
“Why aren’t we giving magnifying glasses to men so they can examine their own penises!”Yeah, the men will love that!Very funny comment, thanks.
Aren’t women looking at their vulva as well? So this should be called vul-gate. And all good catholics read the vulgate.
If people want to prevent their views from being criticized and protect their faith, maybe they should consider bringing it all back inside, behind closed doors at it were, and refrain from forcing their spiel on others.Otherwise, anything put in the public arena is fair game, and there is not anything quite so public as religion has been in the last few thousand years. Criticism of religious claims freely promoted in public does not constitute oppression or persecution, obviously.
oh shit. I laughed so hard when I read the “fuck that” paragraph. Hahahha. Ah man. nailed it. thanks.
It makes me wonder if these folks realize, at some level, that their belief-system is on the ropes. The fact that they so often play the ‘Persecution Card’ seems a lot like blind panic to me.
I may have to do something similar. I bet just leaving it as God intended would be…terrifying. *rubs hands gleefully and consults husband to be cameraman*
Okay honestly… as a (admittedly rather liberal) Christian, I found your rant about respecting our beliefs when they deserve respect to be incredibly upsetting. And not a lot upsets me; if they’re trying to educate women about their own anatomy, great! Go for it! But don’t say that our views aren’t deserving of respect just because they happen to be religious views that are different from yours. You don’t have to agree with it or believe it. Just that respect that we do.Only then will you get ANY remote form of respect, from anyone other than those who wholeheartedly agree with everything you say, for your own opinions. I’m sorry, but just because my beliefs are different than yours does not mean they are “undeserving” of respect. As that is the only criteria you give for them being undeserving of respect.
Comprehension fail. We don’t not respect your beliefs because they’re different from ours. We don’t respect them because they’re absurd.
I think leaving it as God intended would be terrifying to straight white males who were fed a steady diet of bald yoni porn for decades AND the religious right. You can kill two birds with one stone.Just make sure you use a mirror, yo.
Why sarcasm? I like your comment for what’s written!
What makes you think yours are better?
In *your opinion* they are absurd. We have our reasons for believing as we believe. Just like you have your reasons for believing as we believe. Just because we believe something that you don’t does not automatically make our beliefs “absurd” or “not deserving respect”. Until you can give me a rational explanation as to why a religious belief is not deserving of respect, you will not have mine either. Not because you believe differently, but because you refuse to engage in thoughtful debate rather than a belittling war.
Correction: you have your reasons for believing as YOU believe. Sorry, late night and tired brain.
One need not respect your belief, but that does not mean one does not respect your right to hold such a belief. That is the fundamental difference that seems to escape so many Christians.A person’s beliefs, whatever they may be, are not a priori deserving of respect. Indeed, this notion that beliefs are a priori deserving of respect is anathema even to Christian thought: the notion of heresy, for instance.What is it about ‘religious belief’, in and of itself, that allows it to be afforded respect? Does this hold for any other beliefs? For all beliefs? Would you really respect an obviously (even to you) absurd belief, or would you not respect it but still respect the person’s right to hold the absurd belief?And the notion that we atheists claim religious belief is absurd simply because it is a different belief to yours is, itself, an absurd claim. Our assertion that such beliefs are absurd is because we have examined those beliefs and found them to be absurd.Can you even see the difference?
What about this woman’s beliefs? Do you honestly respect them?
My beliefs are better because they aren’t based on believing in magic and taking things on faith.
“We have our reasons for believing as we believe”Great. And if you want us to respect our beliefs, you can explain those reasons to us, and we’ll see if they make sense to us. But if those reasons are bad, then we will continue to not respect your beliefs.
Do the beliefs of the people who sentenced this woman to death deserve respect?
Thanks for sharing this, Jen! It sounds like things haven’t changed that much since I was a budding feminist undergrad at Dartmouth. Someday I’ll have to tell you about the Bloody Tampon Protest at the Phallic Bonfire. Those were the days.
You’ll have a hard time on this blog explanation to any one how god intended anything. I’d think explaining your motivations to your husband would be comparatively easy.Shave that thang!!!!
yes…
My probem is not that they see my belief as silly. My problem is saying that they are not deserving respect for no other reason than “it’s absurd”. That is no different than saying “your beliefs deserve no respect because I think you’re a moron”. Which may not be word for word what is said, but it is exactly the tone conveyed. That is not even respecting that I hold those beliefs. If someone would give me actual reasons that they disagree, rather than reducing it the whole debate to saying “well I’m right and you’re absurd”, then I might be willing to talk more. Religious belief is no different than non-religious belief in deserving respect. It is simply someone else’s world view, and yes this referrs to all beliefs. With regards to the video you posted, that is different; the woman probably has a diagnosable medical problem. Not to mention, her claim to be the mother of an alien race can also be proven false. We can prove where she came from and that she is, in fact, human. You cannot prove the existance of God to be false (no matter how many atheists say that we already have. I say science only proves His existance, but that’s another debate for another day). So yes, all beliefs and worldviews do deserve to be respected. You won’t get anywhere in a debate, or even in life, without that.You seem like a rational person to discuss things with. If I ran into you around a forum somewhere, I’d be happy to get into all kinds of discussions with you. But for right now, I’m taking myself out of the discussion; I just can’t see it going anywhere once it’s been reduced to the “mine are right yours are absurd” argument.
That is exactly my complaint about blaghag and loreleion. They did not try to find out any other religious person’s opinion. They just painted us all as believing in something without thought, when most Christians that I know (as in, not some of the more insane ones like those talked about in the blog) have put a great deal of thought and reflection into our decision to follow this lifestyle. Hell, Newton was a staunch Protestant who went into science because he thought that the examination of the natural world was glorifying to God. So it’s not a “science vs faith” issue to me, it’s “science AND faith”. We’re not morons. Most of us put at least as much thought into believing as atheists do into not believing. But I’m out. If someone is willing to discuss things, fine. But do not paint me or my opinions as not worthy of respect just because I have chosen to believe in God and follow Christ. That is my choice, I did not go into it blind to the rest of the world.
A Liberal Christian wrote: > Until you can give me a rational explanation as > to why a religious belief is not deserving of respectOk, Let’s start with the misogynistic horseshit in the OT:Leviticus 12:5If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. (as opposed to be unclean for “only” one week if she has a boy).Leviticus 15:19-24 19 “‘When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. 20 “‘Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. 21 Anyone who touches her bed will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 22 Anyone who touches anything she sits on will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 23 Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, they will be unclean till evening. 24 “‘If a man has sexual relations with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean. And let’s not forget that lovely story of Lot offering his daughters to an angry mob in order to save a _male_ stranger (genesis 19)Tertullian – considered the father of Latin Christianity wrote:”In pain shall you bring forth children, woman, and you shall turn to your husband and he shall rule over you. And do you not know that you are Eve? God’s sentence hangs still over all your sex and His punishment weighs down upon you. You are the devil’s gateway; you are she who first violated the forbidden tree and broke the law of God. It was you who coaxed your way around him whom the devil had not the force to attack. With what ease you shattered that image of God: Man! Because of the death you merited, even the Son of God had to die. . . . Woman, you are the gate to hell. REady for the NT?: Ephesians 5:22-23″Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church”Revelation 14:4These [redeemed] are they which were not defiled with women Colossians 3:18Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. 1 Peter 3:7Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner……1 Corinthians 11:3But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man…1 corinthians 11:8-9For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.1 corinthians 14:34-35Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.1 Timothy 2:11-14A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.1 Timothy5:6 But the widow who lives for pleasure is dead even while she lives.When you’re done attempting to defend that, we’ll move on to condoned slavery and genocide.How’s that for rational justification?
Ironically you have both missed the point and given me more evidence for my original argument. Thanks!
“Not to mention, her claim to be the mother of an alien race can also be proven false.”So there ARE some beliefs you don’t respect.
Blaghag didn’t dismiss your views. She just said some beliefs weren’t worthy of respect. She didn’t even mention your beliefs.Lorelion did. And I suppose it’s possible that you have reasons for believing that we have never heard before that actually make sense. But at this point in my life I have talked to an awful lot of Christians and people of other faiths, and none of them have come up with reasons like that.
I don’t care how much thought you’ve put into it. If you believe that a zombie god sacrificed himself so he could forgive people, that’s absurd, and yes, I’ll dismiss it. I’ve heard many bad arguments for the zombie god, and at this point I don’t need to hear every single Christian’s excuse for their belief before I dismiss that belief as absurd.
But she thought about it deeply!
chicago dyke got it right…”a simple “have you looked at your vagina lately? if not, why not? we’d like you to think about that” would’ve sufficed.”Exactly.Christianity could care less if you look at your own holy of holies, or not. Hinduism cares, and so would Sikhism.Typical Americans…think they the only folk in the world…Only Christians and pagans attend American universities, right?Mayuka crossed the line through her betrayal of her privilege to put the politically correct version of the Orchid Project in student’s Hinman Boxes. That scheming dogmind altered the already reviewed delivery, and sought to evangelize students with this loaded statement, “its purpose to encourage students “to shift their perspective from the expectations and limitations of belief patterns… [and] religious conditioning”.”Religious conditioning? There is no such thing. At least not when we regard authentic Christian revelation versus what Good Book Baptist tries to tell us.As if some chic (Mayuka Kowaguchi) from a culturally compromised (we remember how you brutally tortured Canadian prisoners in WW II) nation (Japan) is NOW going to teach us~When your own religious culture has no connection to the Judaeo-Christian religions, one can’t really assume to teach Westerners about anything…or attempt to enlighten us. Especially, in the lofty department of religion. The lower never teaches the higher.Secular Humanism is a recognized religion in the United States of America, so Yoko should actually be sued for trying to indoctrinate the Dartmouth women. I’d be suing her.Japanese need enlightenment, maybe not in building cars, or cameras, BUT where it really matters…religion. Besides, the Japanese usually copy everything we do. Apple creates the iPad…Samsung creates the iCopy…PLUS Yoko isn’t culturally sensitive at all! And, I forgot about the I-slammers…What about all those female Muslim Islamist students who will look IN VAIN, for their pleasure-point clitorises?You know, they’ll only see…and find a gouged out spot!Huh? Yeah…Yeah.Put your thinking cap on, gurl~Fuck, what is wrong with you people?
PLUS…”Why are so many people starting to criticize Christianity? It’s not a mass conspiracy – it’s because you’re wrong.Ah, Jenny-doodles, we ain’t wrong about anything.At least when you view things from Rome.Your religious ignorance is astounding. Stick to exposing those boobs of yours, stick to something you can handle and know quite well about, eh!Atheists are quickly dispatched through on-the-spot religious testing performed while in the presence of their peers. One only needs to demonstrate religious ignorance for all to get it.Here are some questions I would ask every pompous atheist.Why did Jesus have to die in Jerusalem, and only there.Where is the Garden of Eden located, today?Jesus is the New Adam, who is the New Eve?Why was Eve created from Adam?Was the Arc of the Covenant really destroyed, or is it in existence today?How did God “load the deck” when he created Mary?Was Jesus naked on the cross? What proves He wasn’t?Where is Protestantism mentioned in the New Testament? What’s its defining mark according to the writers of the Epistles?Why did Jesus establish a papacy?How are Jews and Muslims different in the eyes of God?When is homosexuality right?Can’t answer these questions?Then, come back when you know something~
If you’re not a Poe, I really hope you’re getting the help you need.