Racism wrong, Homophobia acceptable?

See how much time it takes to exercise your vanity. In contrast, in half an hour you can take on the world!

 

*chuckles*

 

At this very moment, somebody is emailing Jerry Falwell a copy of that list, with a note attached that reads, "At last! We have PROOF!"

 

Darth_Snowdog - how are you able to read my sent mail? Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.....

 

By the way... Matriarchal societies have existed, and do exist... not just in myth and legend... but Agricultural societies are largely patriarchal. However, often you have to look to horticultural and/or tribal hunter/gatherer societies to find evidence of matriarchy these days.

On the other hand, one of Egypt's greatest rulers was a female Pharaoh... Hatshepsut.

Three other examples of matriarchal societies: The Nagovisi of Bougainvillea in the South Pacific. The Khasi of Meghalaya, India. The Machinguenga of Peru.

The myth about matriarchal societies is that they don't exist and have not existed in the distant past, either. This is a myth that has been perpetuated by... patriarchal industrial-agricultural societies... The same societies that perpetuate one cultural myth or another which insists that nothing existed prior to the agricultural revolution that took place approximately 6000 years ago... who else? They believe that it is impossible for matriarchal societies, culture, art, and even history itself, to have existed prior to their form of industrial-agricultural society.

It is no coincidence that the technologically-advanced agro-industrial society arose at the same time as written language and mathematics... This is one of the primary hinderances modern society has in accepting evidence, archaeological, paleontological, etc. which suggests the occurrence something beyond the subjective written accounts, some historical and some mythical, to which they have become accustomed.

 

Most evidence in religous history also points to the abandonment of the fertility mother goddesses as the heads of various pantheons coincided with the agriculural revolution.

 

Since in my personal background of anthropolgy I have never heard of the Navajo as being described as a matriarchy, I would like know what aspects of Navajo culture constitutes a matriarchy.

I learned they had complete political (decision-making) power over the tribe, which I thought would qualify under your criteria as a matriarchal aspect. I'm not sure whether you're saying this doesn't qualify, or that they didn't have such power, and my learning is incorrect. So let's just go with your understanding, since it's your subject. Given all the revisionist history available today, I wouldn't even know how to begin to evaluate sources, anyway.

But I'll be frank - I lean toward SnowDog and Sleazo's posts as closer to the truth. There IS reason for current historians to want to deny matriarchy ever existed, so I have to take what they say with a spoonful of salt. I see a lot of sense in the theory I described in an earlier post, and Sleazo's comment about goddesses adds to it.

As for the BS of the work place, it also pisses me off to no end that people with kids get to take time off willy nilly for "kid emergencies" while single people get stuck with the work. As if staying home with little Susy is somehow more legitimate than a single person taking some "me time". Sorry, but it is not. Both are CHOICES that people make, and frankly, having children is not any more noble than not having children.

Very well said! In some cases, it's worse - I have a very self-centered aunt, and I maintain the kindest thing she did for anyone ever was not to have children.

Also, who covers family leave? We do! Extra work, same pay. Thanks, Clinton.

And as for the benefits issue... well, that's just one of many things wrong with insurance in general, but I agree again.

LOL @ Ender! Cwrn_Puppet, I know how it sounded to you at first, but he makes raucous, sarcastic fun of everything.

About conservatives labelling everything they don't like "too PC"... I've never heard worse whiners than angry young white boys who suddenly find themselves in a world where they have to compete with - get this - WOMEN for jobs. Well, actually I need to add angry Mexican-American boys. I have no general bias against these guys, but there is apparently a bias in their culture to loathe white women, because they're as catty and rude toward me as Southern white mama's boys - and that's some primo cattiness.

 

I've been out of it for a day or so...

so please tell me how a debate on the acceptiblty of homophobia got changed into a debate about matriachal socity, femisit work benifets, and other things?

 

Racism is wrong. Homophobia is wrong. Homosexuality is a mental disorder.

Anyway, this thread is redundant.

 

TreeCave and CwrnPuppet: Very, very well said. White males who whine about political correctness (the white males in my family being some of the worst) are forgetting a very important point--they've ruled the known world for almost as long as history has been recorded. So it's not as easy as it used to be--cry me a river.

And as far as childless adults bearing the brunt--thank you, TreeCave. I've been married eight years and haven't had children. When I was teaching high school, I was told that since I didn't have to go home and take care of several kids, I must have time to plan the prom, plan the senior trip, sell senior T-shirts, run two other clubs, and coach cheerleading. That is no exaggeration. I finally quit that job and moved to a town that is much more open-minded as far as not believing that women are just baby-making machines and that I must not be doing my duty because I wasn't reproducing; I now have a principal who was very understanding when I told her I wasn't taking on every extracurricular activity in the school.

Anyway, closer to being on-topic--do you guys remember when the Southern Baptists boycotted ABC and all Disney corporations because Disney gave benefits to domestic partners? Why on earth were the Southern Baptists so worried about what strangers do in their bedrooms? It seems like they could find something more important to worry about, like nuclear war. *shrugs*

 

Gutter-monkey, it morphed like a lot of topics do. It wasn't really "feminist work benefits" however - it was about single, non-child-raising people. Men without kids are also expected to not mind working late, not having benefits ("as you're not supporting a family")... anyone without kids in the workplace tends to be seen as having nothing else in their life that could possibly come ahead of work. Most gays will always be in this position, which is the only reason I left my comments in here.

AG, I don't know what Southern Baptists are on about. Now, I was raised American Baptist (my father was even a minister with a masters of divinity), and here's what I learned: homosexuality is not the natural state (like manic-depression or having eyes of two different colors), but we counsel church members who find themselves having homosexual urges, and we counsel homosexuals who wish to join the church, as anything but apostasy (the sin of recognizing Jesus as your savior, but later forsaking him) is forgiveable by God.

Beyond that, I was taught that the specific instances of homosexuality in the Bible were orgies (like Saddam and Gemorrah) performed in worship of other gods (Baal, in that instance). These were heterosexuals engaging in homosexuality to worship Baal. Now, to have homosexual sex when you're heterosexual IS perverse - it's going against your own nature. So doing that just for kicks would be wrong to Baptists.

But our church believed that it was quite possible today's "homosexuals" - people who did not feel comfortable engaging in anything BUT same-gender relationships - might not be making a choice, that it might be a genetic trait or something they had no power to change. So we reserved judgment.

That's a reasonable enough stance, I believe. Doesn't conflict with the Bible, doesn't stir up a major issue where one needn't exist.

 

I, too, am an anthropology student and the information that I submitted was from my spring 2002 semester "Sociocultural Anthropology" text book, copyrighted 2001. If you re-read my post, I did not say that the Navajo were "Martiarchy" but were "Martrilineal." There's a difference.

I was trying to show the distinctions between the two. Apparently, there were some questions about that from earlier posts.

Darth_SnowDog if you have the source for your information (about Matriarchal societies), I would really be interested in getting a copy of it, if that's okay with you

 

I guess I wasn't clear in defining matriarchy since people are mentioning cultures in which women have/had autonomy, but autonomy does not equate to matriarchy. I really did not want to get into a discussion of power systems, kinship decent, and anthropological theory because it would be a little too involved and too much like being back in class [1]. But I suppose to truely discuss this issue, we have to look at those aspects. I will do some more in depth research on the groups mentioned and write again soon. But from what I know about those groups it that what has been postulated as proof of their matriarchical nature was done in terms of reframing the meaning of matriarchy.

Secondly, idea of matriarchy is not new. The early evolutionists thought the same thing. Except, they thought matriarchy was a stepping stone to the more advanced patriarchy. Upon closer inspection by later anthropologists, those cultures that looked like matriarchies really weren't. The were matrilines, which isn't the same.


[1]Plus, the only books I still have for quick reference are ones from my interests: human behavorial ecology and evolutionary archaeology.

 

Endor: Your post cracked me up

It reminded me of that "day of a cat vs day of a dog" email that was going around.

 

I guess I wasn't clear in defining matriarchy since people are mentioning cultures in which women have/had autonomy, but autonomy does not equate to matriarchy.

So are you saying I'm incorrect in stating that Navajo women made decisions for the entire tribe? Or are you saying that such decision making is merely autonomous? Because I thought "autonomous" would mean a woman making decisions for herself, having rights. To make decisions for the whole tribe would be something else.

I'm just curious as to exactly which part of what I'm saying is incorrect - the semantics, or the facts.

 

LOL @ Ender!

Endor: Your post cracked me up

The Homosexual Agenda text isn't my creation. Someone posted it on the infidels.org forums. CwrnPuppet had to be notified of this horrible agenda that that is occurring subversively.

 

BobaFrank: Homosexuality is a mental disorder.

Not according to the DSM or any reputable psychologist. Homosexuals live sane, well-adjusted lives despite severe discrimination and I think that speaks volumes. Gay people have problems, just like everyone else does, but that certainly doesn't make them crazy.

Anakin_girl: Anyway, closer to being on-topic--do you guys remember when the Southern Baptists boycotted ABC and all Disney corporations because Disney gave benefits to domestic partners? Why on earth were the Southern Baptists so worried about what strangers do in their bedrooms? It seems like they could find something more important to worry about, like nuclear war. *shrugs*

Oh, yes... What fun that was. My step-mother is a southern baptist who was always a huge Disney fan. One day, she came home from church and threw all of her Disney movies and collectibles out. To complicate matters, this pyscho woman is also raising my little sister, who now tells me that I am going to Hell. Let's hear it for brainwashing, ladies and gentlemen!

TreeCave: Now, I was raised American Baptist (my father was even a minister with a masters of divinity), and here's what I learned: homosexuality is not the natural state (like manic-depression or having eyes of two different colors), but we counsel church members who find themselves having homosexual urges, and we counsel homosexuals who wish to join the church, as anything but apostasy (the sin of recognizing Jesus as your savior, but later forsaking him) is forgiveable by God.

This is interesting... I have a few comments to make - first of all, I am both gay AND have two different colored eyes. Yeesh! God really must have it out for me!

Secondly, about the "counseling" of homosexuals, I have mixed feelings about this. Part of me says that these people are genuinely thinking that they are doing the right thing, that they are being helpful and that they have the best of intentions. The other part of me says that they are only serving to further complicate the problem by making homosexuals feel as if their feelings are wrong, sinful and to be hidden away and ignored. Repression packs with it a very powerful bomb that in many cases will explode with disasterous results.

My step-mother actually sent me to some of these counselors, (an act which caused many angry words between she and my real mother). Most of these people were "converted" or "saved" homosexuals themselves and she stopped forcing me to go after I had successfully seduced three of them.

As for "apostasy", I must say that this makes no sense to me. Wouldn't this concept blatantly contradict the parable of the prodigal son?

 

The Homosexual Agenda text isn't my creation. Someone posted it on the infidels.org forums. CwrnPuppet had to be notified of this horrible agenda that that is occurring subversively.

Yeah, my mom sent me that list in an e-mail a few years ago - I think it's been circulating for quite some time. Either way, I definitely needed a reminder on the dastardly plans of those vile, nefarious and plotting homosexuals.

 

"she stopped forcing me to go after I had successfully seduced three of them."

[image=http://www.swmcmmj.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/pimpy.gif]

 

Hey, it was an easy and somewhat enjoyable way out of an annoying situation! ;c)

 

Thank you chibiangi for any information that you can offer me as well, but it was Darth_SnowDog, that had the information that I was really interested in. Plus, I was wondering, are you a 'physical' or 'cultural' anthropologist? I'm a cultural anthropologist myself.

"Beyond that, I was taught that the specific instances of homosexuality in the Bible were orgies (like Saddam and Gemorrah) performed in worship of other gods (Baal, in that instance). These were heterosexuals engaging in homosexuality to worship Baal. Now, to have homosexual sex when you're heterosexual IS perverse - it's going against your own nature. So doing that just for kicks would be wrong to Baptists."

TreeCave, I find it interesting that you would choose those examples from the Bible to support your argument and/or stance. In each of those instances, the people involved were against God, His will, and His laws. For example, King Ahab of Israel was one of many preceeding rulers of Israel who introduced idol worship into Israel and was undermining God's prescence with His people. Those passages in the scripture where suppossed to be taken as perversions or evil actions by those who did not worship or acknowledge God.

But then again, the Bible is open to interpretation, so I guess that means that its okay ..... right?

CwrnPuppet ... your second eye-color isn't 'natural' is it? Just curious ....

 

My second eye color IS natural... and it isn't... One of my eyes is a bit more green and one is a bit more blue - this bothered my parents, so they got me colored contacts, each tinted so that it would even out the colors. Being rather fond of the asymmetry, myself and having identical prescriptions in each eye, I simply reversed them so that it accentuated it.

 

ha, ha!!! That's cool!!! I have a couple of friends who do the same thing and although at first its a bit distracting, at the same time it is soooo different that it really makes them stand out in a crowd!

"Originality" is the key my friend ... Thanks for the FYI!!!!

 

My pleasure. :c)

 

Thank you chibiangi for any information that you can offer me as well, but it was Darth_SnowDog, that had the information that I was really interested in. Plus, I was wondering, are you a 'physical' or 'cultural' anthropologist? I'm a cultural anthropologist myself.

Well, I'm interested in biological anthropology and archaeology. I'm kind of hesitant to stick those areas into the "physical" category because I generally equate that with studying bones and physical evolution, whereas I'm more interested in behavioral evolution and archaeology. But I have had a pretty extensive background in cultural anthropology as well. In fact, I love cultural anthropology, even though I shy away from the more theoretical aspects of it. I'm definately not a PoMo

It's nice to see another anthropologist on the board. If you want, please send me a PM.