Antifeminist day at the beeb

So, I come out of my lengthy blogging break to point out two BBC articles which pissed me off this afternoon. Firstly, poor old Jeremy Paxman is being discriminated against! I know, I know, it certainly doesn't seem that way, with his comfortable Newsnight position, and lucrative interview possibilities. However, apparently this is all totally irrelevant, as, because Paxman can name 5 women prominent in broadcasting, it seems that suddenly white middle class men are being horribly discriminated against. Hmm. I seriously disliked him anyway, he is so arrogant, but I am sad to see that my worst suspicions have been proven true. He is also a pathetic misogynist who is clearly intimidated by the fact that white middle class men might be forced to actually prove their talents in future, rather than just relying on their gross overprivilege. So, get over yourself Paxman, and realise that you are not as entitled as you would like to think, and hopefully soon everybody will come to view you as an irrelevance, as I do.

Secondly, there is to be a Nun's beauty pageant held online. There is so much that is fucked up about this that I really don't know where to begin. It just goes to show what happens when you have a patriarchy. Firstly, women must be dressed 'modestly' in order to avoid inflaming the passions of men, who apparently, are incapable of self-control. Then, reproductive choice is systematically opposed, with the ultimate goal of reducing women to being walking incubators. Finally, it seems, despite all of this, women must still be sexy. I try not to put anything past the catholic church these days, however, even I was pretty surprised to read this story today. They utterly disgust me with their hypocrisy, and their shocking treatment of women.

Obama fear

from Salon

Pope really worried about the damage rape scandals have done to the Catholic Church

The Prada Pope made some revealing comments, which were reported in yesterday's Guardian, revealing his true concerns about the priests who committed countless rapes in the States during the nineties.

"It is a great suffering for the church in the United States and for the Church in general and for me personally that this could happen," Benedict said aboard a special Alitalia airliner, nicknamed Shepherd 1.

Yeah, because when I read about priests raping little kids, my primary concern is for the Church and for the Pope. My heart is bleeding for those guys. Fuck those whingeing victims who have cost us so much money in compensation, and damaged our reputations!

But he does have a point, the child abuse scandals did damage him personally, as there is an increasing body of evidence which suggests that he was involved in trying to cover up the scandals.

Marriage

Courtesy of www.chicago-smile-makeovers.com

Marriage has probably been once of the most difficult areas for me to come to terms with as a feminist. Although to a certain extent, I have always felt that women are underrepresented in Parliament, in business and in academia, to give a few examples, and I was aware of other inequalities, I only started to actively identify as 'feminist' a few years ago. Until I did that, I had always imagined that I wanted a white wedding, not necessarily large, but definitely with a big white dress, and in a church.

Then I became a feminist, and I started to think about the traditions which surround weddings. I read interesting articles like this, this, and this. I began to wonder about the overtones of ownership, transfer of property, virginity, as well as more modern traditions, for example, the way that the press refers to 'bridezillas'. I don't know how I fit into this. My partner had a very traditional upbringing, and, although he is sympathetic to feminist values, would like to get married one day. Deep down, I would too. I went to a wedding at the weekend, and it was an interesting experience for me. I haven't been to a wedding since I started to identify as a feminist. It was in a church, and I was even more convinced that that sort of wedding was not for me. I hate the idea of being given away by my father; I am not a piece of property to be handed over! I don't believe in God, and so all of the references to God within the service would be meaningless to me. I don't want a significant part of my wedding ceremony to be either meaningless or offensive to me. I want every word to have significance. I want it to be personal. I want it to reflect me, my partner, and our relationship. So I guess a church wedding is out then!

But there were things which I felt that I do want to have one day. I would like to be legally and emotionally unified with my partner by going through a ceremony which is meaningful to both of us. I would like to show my family and friends the commitment which I have to him, and which he has to me. I would like to have the same last name (more to come on that later!).

Will I wear a white dress? I don't know. I have very mixed feelings about it. I don't like the overtones of purity and virginity, which it is intended to imply. However, I don't want to remove all tradition from my day, so that it is not recognisable as a wedding. Also, I love dresses, and I like the idea of wearing a beautiful white dress - I'll only get the opportunity once after all!

I expect that I will make a speech at the reception. The day is about me and my partner - I should be able to have a say! I will not throw my bouquet. If women attending my wedding want to get married, then they should ask their partners themselves, rather than relying on antiquated traditions to try to get their partners to propose to them!

I imagine that we will double-barrel our names. My name is quite unusual, and it is so much a part of me, and how I define myself, that I cannot imagine being without it. My partner's is very common, and will go well with mine. I think this is a wonderful way for us to show our commitment to one another. It is symbolic of how we intend to keep our own identities, but also how our lives will become unified, by keeping our own names, but also gaining the name of the other. I am a 'Ms' now, and I expect that that will not change.

As for the proposal, engagement rings etc, I guess I'll wait and see how it pans out. I would certainly not rule out proposing to him, but I won't say definitely whether or not I will because he reads this blog! If he proposed with an engagement ring, I would be happy. I love all jewelry, and I am a complete magpie when it comes to shiny things like diamonds. He knows this, and I suppose as long as he understands the terms on which I would wear such a ring, then I would be able to wear it happily.

This was a bit of a stream of consciousness post, but it is helpful to get these things written down. I often find that writing things down helps me to clarify my stance on various issues. I suppose what I want most is a day that my partner and I can look back on happily, and which fits in with our worldview and values system.

This is the reality of churches in middle England today.

My partner's parents are devout Christians. This has caused problems on occasion in the past. However, things have got easier, and these days, the relationship between my (athiest) partner and his parents is generally good. We agreed to go to a carol service with them at their local church on the 23rd. The church itself was lovely, very simple inside, but lit by Christmas lights and candles, which made for a good atmosphere. The service was well-attended, and the carols were good.

Now on to the negatives. I had never realised that there were so many pro-life paternalistic, and patriarchal overtones in the Christmas story. During the readings, I became very uncomfortable with the messages which were being conveyed. Mary, for example, is given no choice in whether or not to carry God's child. Furthermore, when Joseph finds out that she is pregnant, he no longer wants to marry her, but is persuaded by an angel sent by God who assures him that Mary is 'unsullied' and therefore is fit for marriage. There were many other examples, and at some point I intend to read these Bible passages in detail, and then write a critique of the ideologies expressed.

The worst thing was however yet to come. The vicar at this church felt that it was appropriate to start his sermon by making jokes about the name "Mohammed", and encouraging the congregation to laugh (which they did). My partner and I were so paralysed by horror that all we were able to do was to stare at each other in disgust. If this is the sort of 'tolerance' of other religions which the Church of England practices today, then it makes me want to run as fast as possible in the opposite direction. I cannot believe that he is able to get away with that sort of reprehensible behaviour. The Church of England should be deeply ashamed of itself. I am certainly ashamed for it.