What Feminism Has to Offer

In the past few weeks, I have heard and even participated in different conversations about women, and their roles in society. These conversations stem from many different places, concepts, and beliefs, of which I will try to address. Some words that we use have a negative connotation, like the word "feminism," which has come to mean something totally different than it was ever intended to mean. According to dictionary.com, feminism actually means "Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes." Feminism, like the civil rights movements of the 60's, is about equality, not one sex dominating another, which is usually what thoughts arise when that term is used today.

There are women out there that believe that because men dominated women for so long, that now was time for a change, where women dominated over men. That concept is part of what is called radical feminism. Unfortunately this view is why the term feminism has become such a negative term in our world today.

I would consider myself to be a feminist in the original meaning of the word. This does raise some questions however, some of which I will address today, but there are many more views and questions that have been raised by countless others, of which most of them I will not address today.

I would consider myself a follower of God, and as such, I believe that what the church has done to women is terrible! We, the men of the church, myself included, have told women what they can and cannot do based on how we interpret the bible. We believe and have made women believe that a woman should not and cannot be a president, or even worse a pastor (along with all the other terms for that position). Passages like 1 Corinthians 14 where it talks about women's roles in the church service, or 1 Corinthians 11 where it talks about the man being the head of woman, or Ephesians 5 where it talks about women submitting to their husbands in everything.

Unfortunately pretty much sense those passages were written, men thought that they had the right to dominate women because they took those passages out of context. If God is a God of peace and justice, then why do women, especially in the church, not have the same rights as the men? The bible never says that women cannot be president or even a pastor, so why do so many women think that they cannot? The concept of not having women in leading roles was designed to ensure that men, particularly white men, would have control over women, and thus continue to be the dominant sex.

Before we overreact about what is being said, take a moment to think about where that concept of a male only leadership style came about and why you may or may not believe the same thing. Also remember that when interpreting what the bible has to say it is important to put it in the context that it was originally meant to be heard in (people, place, circumstance, beliefs at the time, values, etc.) I hope that we can learn to overcome this issue and allow women and men to be on the same playing field.

How Evil Can We Be? Views On The Dark Knight Movie

Movie Review: First off, the movie The Dark Knight totally rocks! If you have not seen it yet, you should, even if you have seen go see it again!
I have seen it twice and have enjoyed it both times! It is a powerful movie that will take you to places you never thought that you would go, that is if you will let you mind go there. It is a long movie so be prepared to sit for a long time but it is totally worth it. This movie offers the talents of many great actors/actresses (Christian Bale - Bruce Wayne/Batman, Heath Ledger - The Joker, Aaron Eckhart - Harvey Dent/Two-Face, Michael Caine - Alfred, Maggie Gyllenhaal - Rachel Dawes, Gary Oldman - Det./Commishioner Jim Gordon, and Morgan Freeman - Lucius Fox), who come together in this action packed thriller to bring the story of Batman to life. This is the sequel to the movie Batman Begins, where Batman sees how far he must go to stop this mastermind villain known as The Joker (Heath Ledger) before the city of Gotham is completely destroyed and the mob is once again in control. There is hope however, a new District Attorney (Aaron Eckhart) comes to Gotham and begins to collect the mob. Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) appears to be Gotham's shining light, a glimpse of hope for the citizens of Gotham. An accident however, changed what Harvey Dent strived for and turned him into Two-Face, a villain who's face is half scared and half normal, who acts with a vengeance according to his "lucky" coin. Batman must break his rules in order to defeat his enemies, who have no rules, and save Gotham. The Dark Knight in my opinion is worth 5 stars.

My Thoughts: I went to go see The Dark Knight on opening night. It was packed full of people of all ages, many of whom where dressed up like different characters of the movie (Batman, The Joker, Harvey Dent, etc.). I love opening night movies because you get to see all the different people and who they think is the best character. Surprisingly there where not as many people dressed up like Batman as I thought that there would be. Many people were dressed up like The Joker, which I can only assume that some were dressed like that in honor of Heath Ledger who died of a drug overdose after the film was made, but possibly they may have just like to be different from what they thought everyone else was going to wear.

This brings me to my first thought, what makes people dress/act the way that they do? Some people just like to be different, and so they will do the opposite of what others are doing (ex. if everyone is dressing "emo" those people that dress started to dress that way, will change to a different style to be different and stand out). In the case of The Dark Knight, what causes the characters of the movie to act the way that they do? Does Bruce Wayne dress up in a rubber bat suite just because he has the money to do so, or is there something that he believes is worth fighting for and does the symbol of Batman (for that is really what Batman is, he is a socially constructed image of something else) stand for something more? Does The Joker dress in purple and green and wear clown makeup because he likes those colors or does he where them for something more? Was Harvey Dent elected to D.A. because he looked good or was his position an idea of something more?

I am not going to analyze to much why people who attended the showing of The Dark Knight dressed in the manner that they did, however I do think that people are interesting. Before movies start on opening nights, there is a crew of people who work for the movie theater who play games to try and get people up and moving. I believe that they only do this during movies which they believe are going to be a hit (Lord of The Rings, Indiana Jones, The Dark Knight, etc.) not on the opening night of Wallie or any other movie like that. One of the games that is played is a costume contest to see who was dressed and acted the most like a character from the movie. Everyone who dressed up goes up front and puts on a "show" displaying their costumes and the mannerisms of that particular character. People really get into character! This one guy in particular was a large man, much like myself, but not as good looking, who had on a Batman toy. It was a really tiny Batman chest plate with a small cape on the back, half of a mask and the Batman spikes on his forearms, which could shoot off by the way and was actually pretty sweet. I don't know why he dressed like that particularly because it was obvious that he could not fight crime with a suit that was a little tight, all over, my only guess is that he was trying to be funny or impress someone, or maybe he really thought that he was Batman. Maybe he really was? Who knows, anyway I digress. Now on to the meat of my blog...

In the movie The Dark Knight, the Batman suite stood for something more. In fact in the opening scene there are normal people dressed in Batman outfits trying to stop The Scarecrow and a group of thugs. Needless to say, the wannabe Batmen got served a plate of pain and humiliation, but it was interesting that one of the fakes asked why only Batman could do what he did, and he said because he could. Do we allow a Batman to do the dirty work and stand up for what is right, or should we stand up for what is right and be a Batman where one needs to be? What would happen if people stood up against injustice where ever they saw it? I do not mean that if you are in a bank and in come some robbers that you should stop them, unless you feel that you should, I can't stop you, that is your choice, but my own personal belief is that we should allow the proper authorities to deal with those type of situations. I believe that each of us, no matter who you are, can understand the concept of justice, but the blessing and the curse is that we can choose to be apart of justice or against it, but either way that choice is up to the individual. But what about not doing anything, there is no way that someone who does nothing for or against justice is doing anything wrong, right? One of my favorite quotes is by Edmund Burke who said, "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." When we see injustice happening and choose to look the other way, we are allowing evil to prosper, but again we must choose to be different.

For me, one of the most interesting aspects of The Dark Knight is the fact that good men can and do turn evil, but why? In our society particularly we think that when people are good (morally and ethically sound, based on societies values) that they will not turn evil because of what they know, what they have done or are doing, and/or what they believe. We as a society, particularly people in the United States, are very good a "knowing" who will do what and why they will do it, but when that image is shattered we do not understand what happened because we had it all figured out. "He was a nice man, he loved his wife and kids, he had a great job at a prosperous company, he was well off, he had many friends, everyone liked him... I just don't understand how he could murder his family and then take his own life?" However we are not quite as disturbed when an image of someone is upheld. "I knew she would get pregnant, it was just a matter of time. I mean look at the way she dressed, she was just 'asking' for it [which by the way is a dumb concept by itself, no one "asks" to have something happen to them]."

For people who did not follow the Batman stories and were upset when Batman turned out to be more of a bad guy than they thought or when Harvey Dent went from pursuing justice to seeking revenge, did you ever stop and wonder why they did that, and if put in the same circumstance or even a different one, could you do the same thing? How well do you really know who you are? How well do you know who your friends and family really are? I do not believe that people are born one way or another (i.e. good or bad), however I am a Symbolic Interaction Sociologist, and I believe that people are who they are based on three things: (1) how they were brought up (what morals and values do they hold that have been taught to them by others), (2) after they have been able to compile all that they have learned in the past, what morals and values do they hold at that moment, and (3) what circumstances lead them to where they are at that moment (how they did in school, whether they were athletic, where they worked and do work, their relationships, etc.). This all has to do with context. The context which a person is living at any given moment determines who that person is and what they will do.

Bruce Wayne was raised in white upper class world, where his family had a nice house, nice cars, good friends, etc. He was able to go to a nice school and have whatever he desired. But what made him fight for justice and become a symbol of hope? When he was young his parents were murdered right in front of his eyes, yet instead of becoming the villain he became the hero, whether or not you think that his actions constitute a hero in your mind or not, he still pursued justice, which I believe is what defines a hero. Harvey Dent had obviously attended a good law school, and had the support of the city in order to become the D.A. of Gotham. He had put away most of the mob and was cleaning up the city until an accident happened that turned him into Two-Face. Not only did he get severely scared, but he also lost the love of his life, and now instead of strengthening his quest to defeat evil, he became a weapon of vengeance. He had lost faith in people because people had betrayed him and so to be "fair" with his vengeance he would flip a coin to decide what would happen.

Both in Wayne's mind and in Dent's mind they were doing the right thing, whether or not that reflected the views of the population. We cannot know for certain why someone decided to do what they did, all we can do is look at what aspects of their life affected their decision to do whatever act they did. One of my favorite scenes is where to groups of people, convicts and regular citizens, on two different boats heading away from Gotham are given the choice to destroy the other boat and save themselves if they want but if they don't decied before midnight they both die. Though they both try different ideas about how to get around this problem and save themselves, in the end they both decied that it is not up to them to decied who lives and who dies. Even the convicts who are bad chose to not kill the people on the other boat.

So how evil can we be? Do we trully know what we and those around us are capible of doing if we do not understand their context? How far could we go before we did something that we would regret? Are we willing to do what it takes to ensure that justice prevails, even if it is not the popular choice? I erge us to truely think about how far we could go before we "know" how far someone else can go.

If you enjoyed this topic and would like to know more about choice and what people are capable of, I would encourage you to pick up a book that I had to read for a college class that I took. It is called "The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil" by Philip Zimbardo, his studies website, and here is a blog about The Dark Knight that I found interesting:

http://www.presence.tv/cms/soc_notsodarkknight.php

Our Framed World

If what we knew to be true was not would we still believe that which is wrong because it's easy or would we search for something new? Think about it for a moment. Recently I have been struggling with a few questions that will form into later blogs/notes, but for now I would like to discuss just one of those questions (sorry Mike, it's not the one about the Batman movie, I'm still letting my thoughts about that one brew in my mind).

There is a concept that some of you may have herd about that I have learned about in my sociology classes that is called "framing." Framing is looking at something in a particular context and way of thinking. For example, when we watch a movie on Vietnam (I'm using this reference because I saw Tropic Thunder last night and it was terrible and I'm angry that I spent money on an "A" rated movie that only deserved a "C" maximum), anyway when we watch a movie on let's say Vietnam, we view (or frame) the Vietnam War based on that movie and do not put it in it's proper context. Although many movies come close to how it was in war they are still one-sided, our side, and so they are framed accordingly to how it should h ave gone or how the government would like us to think it went, that is framing. Now I'm not trying to persuade anyone to believe that the government is behind what we know and learn, I'll leave that to your own interpretation and thoughts, what I said about framing was a way to frame what framing is in a visual way (that was way to confusing of a statement, sorry).

Anyway, back to framing, I believe that framing can be a good thing or a bad thing. Good because it can help us learn more about the situation and the context behind something, and bad because if the same situation is framed by someone who does not give the correct context and puts his or her own comments into the situation, it becomes distorted from it's original purpose and can cause people to believe something that is not actually there.

In Men In Black (a really cool movie if you haven't seen it) Tommy Lee Jones (Agent K) tells Will Smith (Agent J) that the way things are framed (there are no aliens living among us) is not true. He says something like 500 years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the Universe, 100 years ago everybody knew the Earth was flat, and 15 minutes ago you knew humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow. (paraphrase)

This next section may come across as heresy and I assure you that it is not, it is just a change in thought and a hope that when when you are done reading that you will not view the world, you life, Christianity, etc. in a new and fresh way. Now again I am not trying to force an opinion on anyone, I am only trying to give another way of thinking about things. Everyone who reads anything has three different options to do when they are done with the particular reading: they can walk away upset that someone would even write such a thing and continue to believe what they have learned, they can think that what was written was interesting and pursue the topic further on their own, or they can take it at face value and incorporate it into their own theology. Personally I believe that the second option is the best because I believe that even if something is true for you, you can find some truth in it, and I also believe that we should not just take people at their word and believe what they say, but that we should question what they say.

When viewing the Bible and doing a Bible study, it is important to to view it in its context. Only once we understand the context of the past, can we apply it to ourselves in the present. We must know that what was written was written by a certain type of people and for a certain type of people. Yes, the Bible was not written for or to us today! Shocking I know, but that does not mean that it does not have relevance for us today! However we can only apply its mean to our lives after we understand where the writers were coming from and who they were writing to and why they were writing to those people. The Bible is a narrative about a people chosen by a loving God to radically change his creation from a path of destruction to a path of life (I am not talking about heaven and hell right now, that talk will come at a later time).

For example, when we read the part in the Gospels (Luke 20:20) about paying taxes to Caesar, we think it is about paying taxes to the government and tithing to the church. Why do we think about it that way? Who was Jesus, who was he talking to, where were they, and what was going on during that time? Take a moment and try and answer those questions yourself.

Jesus was a Jew, born and raised a Jew, in a Jewish culture, and with Jewish beliefs and Jewish customs. In the time of Jesus there were about five major sects of Judaism: Essenes, Sadducees, Pharisees, Zealots and Herodians. The Sadduccees and Herodians believed that corporation with the Romans was essential for survival, the Pharisees and the Zealots believed that they should not be ruled by anyone and that the Jewish people should revolt, and the Essenes believed that they should hid in captivity and preserve their traditions until the threat of Rome was over (that is a small glimpse of the sects, however there is much more that can be learned about them). All the groups tried to see which side Jesus was on, but by saying what he said, he pleased both sides. But to his audience they did not hear paying taxes to Caesar or even to tithe which we so often believe, but rather a call to revolution against the oppression of the Romans but not in a conventional sense with a sword and shield but rather through peace and death.

There is much more to the story than what I have given you, but I am giving an opportunity to search for answers yourself. As always I am up for discussion, but when you respond please do not get upset if I respond by explaining my position, we are not here to persuade each other but rather to challenge each other in our thinking. So back to the original question, if what we knew to be true was not would we still believe that which is wrong because it's easy or would we search for something new? There is much that I believe is not what we have been told, and is worth investigation and questioning. In our search for truth, do not be afraid to search or what the results may be or even what people will say!! For me, I would rather be one person alone who searches for the truth and challenges tradition than a part of a group who is complacent with what they know does not want to take the challenging road!

Boundaries

Recently in my wanderings, I have been thinking about boundaries and more precisely the power of the thought of boundaries. We all have boundaries (physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, sexual, etc.) and it is easy to see the affects of these boundaries by how people act and think or rather how they do not. There are boundaries that are imposed by others, mainly those in control, that keep order and safety among the general populous.

These boundaries are the invisible ones found in the painted lines on the road, the safety of the sidewalk, the shapes of metal, the color of lights, etc. I will look at each one in a moment, but it is the idea behind these boundaries that keeps us at bay. If we do not abide by these "rules" then we have consequences and if we do follow them then we get rewarded. I believe it is the fear of the consequences that make us conform to those guidelines.

The lines (dashed, solid, double dash, double solid, etc.) on a road guide where a car goes and does not go. Even though there is no physical barrier, we still go where they lead, we do not cross them unless it is safe and unless it is allowed by the "rules," we feel safe from other vehicles because if anything were to happen, it is those same "rules" that guide us that also protect us and will make things right if they are broken. The sidewalk is a "safe" place for pedestrians even though, again, there are no walls to physically protect us. However even when we walk on the sidewalk, we walk on the right side even though there is no rule to which side of the sidewalk to walk on, yet we do this because when we drive, we do so on the right side, but what about those people that drive on the left side like in other countries, do they walk on the left side, just the same way they drive, or do they walk on the right side?

Another interesting fact is the power of metal and lights to control us as well. An octagon shape signifies that people are to stop, yet a triangle shape signifies caution or yield. Who decided that these are the shapes of the "rules?" The colors of the traffic lights also dictate when to stop, yield, go. Apparently "go" is the color green, "stop" is red, and "yield" is yellow. Again, there is aspect of these images that decides that they should be followed, yet we rely on these pieces of metal and colored lights to protect us and that if we abide by them we will be safe.

It is interesting how these different images control our very existence and way of life. These images have no value or power accept for those that society defines and regulates. We place a lot of stock in images, we need them to run our lives, or otherwise we think that there will be chaos. I am not saying that these "rules" are bad, they are just my observations on the power of ideas and the thoughts behind the images that control our lives.

Spiritual Abuse

Recently in my Deviant Behavior class we have been talking about different kinds of abuse. Many people have heard of physical abuse, mental abuse, and emotional abuse, but not many people have heard of spiritual abuse. This is something that seems to be a fairly new concept and one in which I believe can be just as damaging as the others and even more so. A friend of mine gave me this website that talks more about spiritual abuse: www.healingspiritualabuse.

com
Check it out it's pretty cool, it defines spiritual abuse as "...similar to emotional abuse and occurs when the leaders of a church or religious organization use their power and position to manipulate, control and/or coerce their congregation/followers/members, whether on purpose or with good intentions" and "...includes, but is not limited to mind-control, thought reform, coersion, manipulation, deception, legalism, authoritarianism, guilt trips, judgementalism/"Phariseeism", holier-than-thou attitude, and a "we are right and everyone else is wrong" attitude."

Chances are that if you have been a part of a church/religious institution whether in membership/attendance/leadership then you have had this done to you or have possible even done it without even knowing that it was happening. I know I was in both areas at one time and sometimes still do it by accident. If you are not sure here are some signs that spiritual abuse is happening:

* Stating personal religious convictions and preferences as fact for everyone
* Requirements for church attendance
* Dress and clothing requirements (appearance is a priority)
* Closed minded about different interpretations of Scripture
* Misinterpretations of scripture
* Questioning the leaders is discouraged
* Judging others
* Excessive gossip
* Hostility towards "heathens" and others who are not believers
* Only people who go to a certain church are believers
* Only reading a certain Bible version is allowed
* Sexuality is seen as dirty, bad, and/or sinful
* Strict discipline standards for children
* Promoting spanking above all other forms of discipline
* Guilt trips for taking vacation and missing church
* Teaching Tithing
* Emphasis on traditions
* Music standards
* Performance appraisals
* Push towards perfection
* Required devotional or quiet time
* Levels or degrees of spirituality
* Focusing on the penalty for sinning
* Emphasis on God "chastening" you
* Looking down on people who have left the church or denomination
* Requiring a refusal of medical services
* Required membership
* Discarding psychology
* Mental health issues are considered sinful or non-existent
* Depression/Anxiety considered a sin
* Your not spiritual enough if something bad happens to you
* God is judging you for sin in your life
* Being told "You need more faith" or "You don't have enough faith"
* Child discipline tactics that include warnings about God's wrath
* Rigid black and white thinking/answers to questions
* Too much emphasis on the spiritual and not enough emphasis on the physical
* Fears about the punishments of God
* Negative messages about sexuality
* Taught to deny the apatites of the body
* Emphasis on reading the Bible and praying heavily to appease God and avoid punishment
* Messages that you aren't spiritual enough
* Your "suffering" (whatever it may be) is a result of some sin in your life
* Your physical illness is punishment for some sin in your life

Now I do necessarily agree with all of these (partially because I am confused by what they mean), I do think that there is some grain of truth. Just as there may not be evidence about emotional abuse, there may not be evidence of spiritual abuse too. Just because there are not any physical signs does not mean that it has not or is not happening. People can heal from physical abuse quickly, but spiritual and emotion abuse takes time to heal, and many people carry the abuse with them their whole lives, and can never fully heal from it.

Unfortunately many people do not know that they have spiritual abuse, because spiritual abusers are good at concealing the spiritual abuse, whether they mean to or not. The only way to stop this from happening is to realize that it is happening, and not allow it. Power and fear are very strong tools, tools that have been used by the religious elite almost from the beginning. No one has the right to tell us what to do, especially now that we do not have one person who can read, give us his interpretation of what anything says, and make us feel guilty if we do not follow what he says. We can read, we can think, we can learn, and we can understand. If we allow spiritual abuse to continue we are giving other people control of our lives and who we are called to be.

However, we must be cautious on blaming others for our spiritual abuse. We do not know whether or not they intended to abuse us spiritually or not. We also do not know what kind of spiritual abuse that they may have suffered or how far it goes back to whether or not someone knowingly abused someone else spiritually. Instead of blaming someone else for your spiritual abuse, look at yourself and think about what you can do to stop it in the future with those you meet.

One final note that I have learned is that no matter what story you are being told, you must look at who is telling the story and why they are telling the story. I know that this may have offended some people and I am not sorry for speaking my opinion. The choice was your's, and you chose to read this, so please know that I am not forcing my opinion on you and you should not force your opinion on me!! However, I do enjoy your comments to me and enjoy the fact that you took time not only to read my opinion but that you also took time to leave me with your opinion, and I will try to respond to your comment quickly. Feel free to ask me questions too about spiritual abuse, because i have not only been a part of the problem, but I have also spiritually abused, and if I did that on purpose or by accident I am sorry!!

We Are All Sociologists

Alright for those of you who read my blogs may know that my titles have been very, umm, starbucks. I have been struggling with changing the titles of my blogs for a while so I think I'm going to stick with this one. I chose "Staring at Shadows" because shadows can look different to different people and many times we stare at them to try and figure out what it is. Life is full of shadows and each person has his/her own idea of what those shadows are, and that is what makes life great!! Everyone has their own thoughts and when I stare at shadows I only offer my view, I am not telling anyone how to live their life or how they should think, I don't have all the answers and I don't believe that we were ment to discover them by ourselves, that is why everyone's oppinions matter. Lets look at these shadows together, and Michael, I know that you will read this and just in case I own the .com .net .biz .every other suffix so there lol. (If you're not Michael, then you won't understand, so don't ask, and don't worry about how crazy I may be).

Anyway, last night in my soc class I asked my professor why she loved sociology so much more than any other field? Her answer was one that I had been thinking about for a long time. She simply said that whether we know it or not, that we are all sociologists, we all may not know the right terms, understand the concepts, or use the right theories, but we all take part in society in some way or another. She also said that it is one of the only things that never stops. For example if you are a construction worker and you work from 9-5, when you go home you don't construct any more, you leave that at work, you may talk about it with your family or friends, but it doesn't continue of every mement of every day, however, we are constantly interacting with other people, you can't just clock out and stop interacting with others. We are constantly thinking about people too. "Why did he dress that way, why didn't he say 'hi' to me, I wonder if she remembered her report, does she like me, etc?"

So I agree with her, that we are all sociologists. We all bring something to the table, and we can all learn something from anything!! Sorry that this isn't quite as deep as some of my other ones, but I just thought that this was interesting, so leave me comments, kudos, or both on what you think.