 |
 |
 |
BONDING vs. BONDAGE
There
is so much in the news these days about how different male brains are from
female brains. It's as if there exists a sort of desperation to prove
that men are the human standard and women can never gain equality.
While we don't have the information to prove these studies wrong,
we do object to the premise that what is being measured starts from an
identical base line.
Take for instance the way boys/men have always, and still are, trained to bond with each other and contrast with how girls/women have always, and mostly still are, trained in bondage. While in most countries, some women appear to be their "own man," as it were (since with good reason there is no comparable phrase carrying the same meaning that would apply to females), the fact remains that this has only been true for the last hundred years or so. And there are still many countries where women still remain totally in bondage.
Even now most cultural institutions consider her the property of her husband (MRS.) Marriage ceremonies STILL find her "given away" by her father (male) to her husband (male). Her reproductive process may be state controlled and in the U.S.A. is in danger of being totally taken out of her control by federal mandate.
But, there have always been a few women who resisted this bondage programming, and their number increases every day, which may indicate that bondage is not merely a genetic anomaly but is culturally enforced programming.
We see male bonding begin early in life. Little boys will band together in a club and put up signs, "no gurls allowed." There is no evidence that this is genetic but plenty of signs that it is a behavior that is learned from imitation of older boys and men.
The ritualistic and complicated handshakes combine with additions to a language that transforms the mother tongue. They produce secret phrases amounting to a nonverbal code that boys carry into adulthood. Or it can be one word like, WHASSUP?
That word hopped out of a T.V. ad for beer and now permeates sports talk radio, becoming a common "guy greeting." In a Washington Post article by Paul Farhi it is defined as "a classic male bonding moment, a verbal high-five. It's pronounced low and throaty, heavy on the testosterone altogether slow and silly..."
But, there have always been men who resisted bonding programming which may indicate that it is not simply a genetic anomaly but learned behavior which now is exacerbated by the emergence of more and more SELF-DEFINED WOMEN.
The prime institution that fosters both bonding and bondage is religion. Males defined it and it defines them as leaders, BONDED to the godhead by gender. It defines women in bondage, as a natural/normal state and is especially obvious in countries where women are not allowed to go to school or work and must have permission from a male parent or husband to go outside of their home.
It
may be convenient to think that men separate religion and politics, but
the recent dust-up in Congress over who would be the next chaplain demonstrates
this is a fallacy. When an officially appointed committee presented
their choice -- a Roman Catholic priest, the Speaker rejected him. Not
because he was Catholic but because he was a Democrat. A Republican
priest was subsequently chosen.
For Christians, Jesus is a template that girls are encouraged to emulate. He was quiet, he was kind, he was weak, he forgave, he suffered, he cared for, he was crucified, he died for MAN -- and he is made to seem totally in acceptance of his role as a sacrifice.
The diaries of our foremothers tell us that little was gained by going to their minister or priest for help when a husband battered them. They were invariably told that they must submit to their husbands in all things.
Today we hear the carefully crafted phrase, used mostly by girls/women "WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?" -- exhibited on a button or emblazoned on the front of tee-shirts. This question is asked whenever some moral dilemma or problem confronts them.
As more and more women are accepting responsibility for themselves and DEFINING THEMSELVES, they would do well to CHANGE THE AUTHORITY they look to for their actions. Jesus was, after all, A MALE who lived in a male world. He had his gang of disciples with whom he bonded.
Of course, when he died, they lost faith and abandoned him. Not so the women in his life who KEPT THEIR FAITH and waited at the tomb -- but a fat lot of good that did them! Men defined WOMAN'S place in his religion and kept HER in it by fear and force. Today's women are waking up to that.
Some are coming to realize that a WOMAN mentor for the 21st Century women is indicated -- one that conveys strength and conviction of purpose. Like Jesus, she need NOT be a living person, a legend will do fine for the out-of-bondage-women of the 21st Century. There are many possibilities.
At the following URL you will find a tee-shirt with the question: "What Would Xena Do?" (WWXD) http://www.northernsun.com/
Click on "new stuff."
:-) Congratulations to Battalion Commander Erin Nicole Claunch. It took 158 years to get women admitted to V.M.I., but already, Claunch, a gender-barrier-breaker in 1997, has advanced to a top leadership post shattering the bondage-barrier.
2000-013
Copyright 2000 Renee T. Louise and Ruth M. Sprague, Ph.D. These articles may be republished for noncommercial use only, provided that they are copied intact, and that this copyright notice is attached. Address all queries to: twanda@together.net.
G e n d e r G a p p e r s T M
|
|
|