Friday, February 09, 2007

Is it right for a Christian to call people names?

Q. Isn't somebody who calls names a meanie meano?

A. Meanie meano? This all started over language that had me spitting soda all over my keyboard. And it's progressed to "meanie meano."

Q. I mean, you're supposed to be a Christian and everything. You quote Ephesians in your sidebar and everything.

A. I'm human. I believe I said I wanted to be more like Jerome Lejeune: Brilliant, devout, gentle, humble. Which I'm not. I'm the first to admit that.

Q. Well then isn't there an apology in order?

A. I have to concede yes. But it sticks in my craw. My mind screams, "How can anybody post 'My vagina is angry' in a public forum and then be hurt, offended, or otherwise troubled when that brings down a Moonbat Alert? It's like somebody toking down in a public park, explaining to the squirrels how the number 12 is the secret of the universe, and them being hurt, offended, or otherwise troubled at being called a stoner."

Q. Shouldn't you look past stuff that strikes you as odd, wrong, or even crazy to try to understand the human being saying/writing the words?

A. Yes. There you're 100% right. It's not hard to concede that a different approach to "My vagina is angry" would have been far more polite, devout, gentle, humble, productive, etc. That's 100% right. I am sorry I did it. I guess that to somebody to whom The Vagina Monologues makes sense, "My vagina is angry" is probably a pithy, witty thing to say. I can't see it. But evidently there's a whole population of people to whom it makes perfect sense.

Q. Then what's the problem with apologizing?

A. Ego. Screaming, "But I was provoked!"

Q. Is that a legitimate excuse?

A. No. You're right there. It's not.

Q. So what are you gonna do?

A. Well, I'm posting this. Posting, "Okay, you're right. And I'll make the effort to do differently in the future. And in the mean time I'll wrestle privately with my pride." Good enough?

10 comments:

Lisa said...

I think "Moonbat" is a term of endearment.

But that`s just me.

GrannyGrump said...

To me, "moonbat" carries connotations of making as much sense as a stoner when not under the influence of any mind-altering substances whatsoever. When a moonbat speaks, I wonder if they're doing drugs, then realize with horror that they're not, that this is as lucid as they get.

And I've done more asking around and discovered that when it comes to The Vagina Monologues, people seem to fall into two distinct camps:

1. It's a celebration of enlightenment and female empowerment!

2. WTF?

I'm solidly in the second camp.

emilyb said...

Christina, you apologoze like my husband. ;P (And that's a compliment. I love him and stuff.)

The thing about "The Vagina Monologues," is that the stories are about girls/women getting beyond identification by sexuality. However, everything we see as women in the media defines us as sex objects. What some did get, and I tried to portray, is that growing up in a small, southern town, all that was expected of ME was to marry and be a mom. Again, defined by sexuality.

The show is also about removing the shame we sometimes hold from abuse.

So, yes, I can see why it seems ridiculous out of context.

I'm sorry you felt provoked. The column was not written with the idea of making anyone angry. I just don't think we have the right spirit, on either side of the abortion debate. I don't think as Christians we should use shame, ridicule or any of those other not-from-God spirits against a woman in a crisis. I felt so abandoned by my community during that time.

I've since learned that "God does not give us a spirit of fear, but the Lord has given us power, love and self-discipline." That's in Timothy II, and I share it with any who come to me in crisis now. I also have to write it on my post-its around the house when I'm facing a hard time.

I wish our leaders would approach these women in crisis with less shame and more of that spirit of God.

emilyb said...

Oh, and moonbat is a loaded word used against the far left to discount any reasonable thoughts they have. First time this moderate girl has been called a moonbat, but I've been called worse.

JWL said...

Seems to me that this is all about the "modern", "progressive" idea that being "just a mom" is somehow shameful. Nevermind that being a mother or father is probably the most important job there is.

There is quite a difference between being identified as a man or woman and being identified as a sex organ. If the "Vagina Monologues" were all about women saying that they do not want to be called "vaginas", but instead want to be called "human beings", fine. Instead it seems to be the exact opposite, which is perverse. Valentine's Day was originally created in order to turn a pagan feast which was all about lust into a day to celebrate real love. Sadly our modern pagans seem to be trying to revert it to its roots.

As for abandoning women in need, that's obviously the wrong thing to do. But it's also wrong to pretend that there's no harm in destroying the innocent unborn child, or just pretending that there's no such thing as good or bad actions, so everybody can just do whatever they want. The Christian way to act would be to help people live virtuous lives while giving them a hand up out of their sinful state.

emilyb said...

I agree on that last line there. I'd probably remove the word sinful though, simply because we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. The word "sin" is so loaded with judgement, and at the end of the day, we are *all* sinners.

I was rereading Timothy last night and noted the words of advisement for us to avoid what we had defined the Lord as in the Old Testament. I think we are so quick to judge sin by Old Test. law, and so quick to judge others which is a sin, and quick to define sin for others, which is a sin...

Well, it's just exhausting.

Which is why I would prefer my state to be lending a gentle hand UP with their time at the capital this year instead of wasting time on judgement.

And I don't think this is a statement about being *just* a mother. It's more of a statement of being a mother...and so much more. I've been writing these columns for years, and that's always been something that I've felt convicted about as both a Christian and a feminist. I also don't think the shame in being *just* a mom is limited to the "progressives." In fact, those labels are really hurting us as Christians as well. I'm thinking again on Timothy and were we are advised not to spend our times fighting each other. These terms..."moonbat" and "progressive" and the dredded "liberal"....all creation of man, NOT God.

JWL said...

It would be nice if we could all give each other hands up as the necessity arises. We all fall into sin and all need a hand up.

As for "liberals", "progressives", and "moonbats", by definition they are the ones who are being aggressive and attempting to change things, for good or ill (in modern times, often for ill). The "conservatives", "reactionaries", and "wingnuts" are the ones who stand against what they hopefully see as a change which will make society worse. In which case I would advise the progressives to lay down their swords and stop attacking me, that I might put down my shield.

GrannyGrump said...

There is quite a difference between being identified as a man or woman and being identified as a sex organ. If the "Vagina Monologues" were all about women saying that they do not want to be called "vaginas", but instead want to be called "human beings", fine. Instead it seems to be the exact opposite, which is perverse.

That's what I thought. Especially when the idea is supposedly to offer some sort of healing to rape victims. A symbolic public pelvic exam doesn't strike me as restoring her sense of dignity, and it's ripping down the same boundaries the rapist ripped down, taking away her right to keep her intimate parts to herself, sharing them only with those she chooses to share them with. It's like, "You've been humiliated by somebody who forced your legs apart and shoved himself literally into your vagina. We'll show how wrong that is by a large-scale public show in which we verbally force your legs apart and verbally shove a huge, staring audience into your vagina.

More rape, if you ask me.

GrannyGrump said...

"From the liberal wieners, to the right-wing nutjobs, this land belongs to you and me"

Doug Parris said...

"I wish our leaders would approach these women in crisis with less shame and more of that spirit of God."
1. If by "Leaders" you mean government officials, they have no business, in any official capacity, "aproaching" women in crisis... unless the women in crisis are breaking some law. Their role in government is making laws against behavior that is innately criminal and prosecuting those who violate them. If, however by "leader" you simply mean someone you follow, then if you find that they are less than charitable stop following them - that's simple enough.
But what is this "shame" you impute to these ambiguous "leaders?" The shame of a woman being exposed for fornication? Whose fault is that? The shame of seeking to have their own children dismembered? Is that not shameful? The spirit of righteousness universally induces shame in evil doers. This is the condemnation: that light is come into the world and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil.