Sense or Sensibilities

Today is the centenary of WH Auden and in rereading some of his poems this morning, I came across this, which it seems to me bears directly on the Democrats’ dilemma – whether in a time of increasing religious fanaticism they should attempt to reach out to the religious or whether here and now is where they should draw a bright line, on this side reason and the enlightenment ideals that the writers of the US constitution stood for, on the other theocracy, oppression and regression.

Digby is hopeful reason will out – but I’m with Auden on this, and not so sure about that at all.

Law, Say The Gardeners, Is The Sun

Law, say the gardeners, is the sun,
Law is the one
All gardeners obey
To-morrow, yesterday, to-day.

Law is the wisdom of the old,
The impotent grandfathers shrilly scold;
The grandchildren put out a treble tongue,
Law is the senses of the young.

Law, says the priest with a priestly look,
Expounding to an unpriestly people,
Law is the words in my priestly book,
Law is my pulpit and my steeple.

Law, says the judge as he looks down his nose,
Speaking clearly and most severely,
Law is as I’ve told you before,
Law is as you know I suppose,
Law is but let me explain it once more,
Law is The Law.

Yet law-abiding scholars write:
Law is neither wrong nor right,
Law is only crimes
Punished by places and by times,
Law is the clothes men wear
Anytime, anywhere,
Law is Good morning and Good night.

Others say, Law is our Fate;
Others say, Law is our State;
Others say, others say
Law is no more,
Law has gone away.

And always the loud angry crowd,
Very angry and very loud,
Law is We,
And always the soft idiot softly Me.

If we, dear, know we know no more
Than they about the Law,
If I no more than you
Know what we should and should not do
Except that all agree
Gladly or miserably
That the Law is
And that all know this
If therefore thinking it absurd
To identify Law with some other word,
Unlike so many men
I cannot say Law is again,

No more than they can we suppress
The universal wish to guess
Or slip out of our own position
Into an unconcerned condition.
Although I can at least confine
Your vanity and mine
To stating timidly
A timid similarity,
We shall boast anyway:
Like love I say.

Like love we don’t know where or why,
Like love we can’t compel or fly,
Like love we often weep,
Like love we seldom keep.

W.H. Auden

Thought For The Day

‘God will save me, if He exists.
The last words of a Ukrainian who clambered into the lions’ enclosure at Kiev zoo to test his faith.

Well I guess that about wraps it up for God then.

Jews have fundie nutters too

See?

The clothes that were set on fire during the demonstration were collected by a haredi organization in the past few months in a door-to-door campaign held in haredi neighborhoods in Jerusalem. During the campaign, clothes deemed “immodest” were collected. Women rose to the challenge. The organization handed out coupons for “authorized shops” to those who handed over “forbidden clothing” so that they can buy new clothes.

In an announcement published by the rabbis, they clearly define what is forbidden to wear:

  • Tricot shirts
  • Lycra shirts and skirts
  • Open-collared shirts
  • Short and tight skirts
  • Skirts with a slit
  • Skirts with a straight cut
  • Long or bulky earrings
  • Clothes and bags in loud, flashy colors
  • Wigs that are too exclusive
  • Transparent or colorful stockings
  • Clunky shoes

The result: Violence
The war against immodesty has recently descended into violence. Extremists attacked women with various sprays who were wearing clothes that didn’t fit their criteria. Clothing stores in Jerusalem have also been hurt. One of the stores near the center of the city sustained an attack of bleach bottles. Tens of thousands of shekels of damage was caused to the merchandise.

Most of the list of verboten clothing is a variation the same old “that whore with her tight clothes makes me think of sex”, but clunky shoes?

Oh, and it’s not just that these clothes drive lustful thoughts in otherwise pure men; they’re to blame for “the troubles befalling Israeli people”; nothing to do with starting a racially segregated state on an ethnically cleansed territory while keeping a couple of million people locked up in bantustans even the old Apartheid regime would’ve admired while than.

Read more about:
, ,

Can I Tempt You To Sin?

Fancy fucking with the patriarchy a little bit?

Punkassblog has a link to one of those batshit fundy sites that’s running a survey on attitudes to what’s allegedly modest or immodest in dress:

Their survey, in which 200 something girls submitted over 300 “is it skanky when I _____” questions, which were then boiled down to something like 150 meticulous statements covering topics like bikinis, body glitter, and appropriate fabrics, complete with pictures for those guys who don’t know what a camisole is because in their minds they call it “she’s wearing that shirt that gets me all hard again.” Boys have to indicate to what degree they agree or disagree with the statements. The results will help girls help guys by finally having a clear set of instructions that will help them avoid being siren songs to sin. Unless you want to be a siren song, in which case the results will give you detailed instructions of exactly where the fine line is for getting your Christian brothers all hot and bothered against their will without overdoing the slut bit.
[…]

Here’s some statements they want yes/no replies to:

#5 It is a stumbling block when a girl reaches into her shirt to adjust a bra strap.

#1 A girl’s physical posture and/or position can be a stumbling block.
#5 The way a girl walks can be a stumbling block.
#4 It is a stumbling block to see a girl lying down, even if she’s just hanging out on the floor or on a couch with her friends.

#1 Putting lip-gloss on in front of a guy is a stumbling block.
#18 A purse with the strap diagonally across the chest draws too much attention to the bust.

And no eating bananas or ice-cream either, I’ll warrant. I’d better put down this lollipop I’m sucking too.

Those poor poor boys, they must be in a constant state of priapism. For god’s sakes, why can’t they just go and have a wank and stop bothering the rest of us?

The Brothers’ softly lit photograph is prominently featured in several places on their site and shows two remarkably handsome, male model-like young men:

Making good fundy girls horny

The dirty, dirty teases. Surely it’s immodest and un-Christian to inflame young girls’ lusts with images like that? Shouldn’t they be covered up?

Joking aside – let’s face it, these are just two young evangelists on the make, no different than the hucksters on the tv channels, in the megachurches or at revival meetings. The only difference between them and an Elmer Gantry or Pat Robertson is that they’ve dressed their hypocrisy up in a slick, hip online image.

They boast that evangelism is a family business to them, which leads me to doubt both their sincerity and their integrity:

Alex and Brett have grown up in a ministry household. Their father, Gregg Harris, is a well-known homeschool author and speaker, teaching elder at Household of Faith Community Church and director of Noble Institute for Leadership Development. Their mother, Sono Harris, is an accomplished speaker and successful speech coach. Their older brother, Joshua Harris, is senior pastor of Covenant Life Church and bestselling author of, “I Kissed Dating Goodbye,” “Boy Meets Girl,” and “Not Even A Hint.”

Do you see anyone actually doing anything in the way iof real work there? No, they’re just sucking off the teat of fundy largesse, as so many others do.

Their website doesn’t appear to be about helping anyone but themseves – it’s primarily about their making a living without actually having to to do any actual work, by trading on their good looks and exploiting other young people’s religious confusion and insecurities to make a buck.

They may not be making much money right now, but just look at the exposure they’re getting. The paid preaching engagements at Christian Academies’ll soon be rolling in.

Their whole site is also a form of porn by proxy. By tempting other supposedly godly young people to thoughts of sex and sin, they’re breaking one of the central tenets of Christianity – that inciting another to sin is a sin in itself and potentially a worse sin than the sin that was encouraged.

Call themselves Christians? Bloody hypocrites and whited sepulchres, the pair of them.

Am I suggesting you go over and freep their poll? Well, yes, yes actually, I am. I suggest we all go over to their survey en masse, wearing our tightest basques, highest heels and filmiest lingerie (and that means you too, guys) and freep it to hell and back.

For further in-depth discussionof the whole issue of fundies pushing ‘modesty’ see also Feminsiting, Pandagon, Feministe and Feministe again.