Is there organized religion after patriarchy? pt. 1

After Patriarchy: Feminist Transformations of the World Religions, edited by Paula M. Cooey, William R. Eakin, & Jay B. McDaniel.

This book is an exploration of what changes might occur in the current largest — and rather androcentric — world religions, in order for them to grow past their current — and usually obsessive — patriarchal bearings. For those who are curious about such things: the book was printed in 1991, two of the three editors are male, and all the article authors are female. There are two articles for Christianity, and one each for Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism. More encouragingly, the book closes with an article on one of the matrifocal Native American cultures, and one by a self-identified spiritual and “feminist freethinker.” The following is a quick review of each article, followed by some personal thoughts in the question indirectly raised by the book’s title.

The first Christian article

In “Black Women’s Surrogacy Experience and the Christian Notion of Redemption,” Delores S. Williams writes of how black women, both pre- and post-slavery, were abusively forced to labor for others — in the fields, as sexual “relief” for white men, or as nurturers for white families at the expense of their own families. She then points out the need for a Christianity which does not replicate as laudably redemptive the concept of service to others unto death, as Jesus apparently demonstrates.

Curiously, Williams does not look to the potentially redemptive iconography of motherhood which is represented by Mary — which suggests to me that Williams is likely Protestant. Instead she looks to Jesus’ ministerial mission of righting relations as inspiration for black women: “the kingdom of God is a metaphor of hope God gives those attempting to right the relations between self and self, between self and others, between self and God” (Williams, p. 11-12). In this perspective, the symbol of the cross is dramatically changed: “a reminder of how humans have tried throughout history to destroy visions of righting relationships that involve transformation of tradition and transformation of social relations and arrangements sanctioned by the status quo” (Williams, p. 12).

Hinduism & Kali

Lina Gupta writes of “Kali, the Savior,” exploring the Hindu scriptures for a more inclusive interpretation of both the goddesses and womanhood. She acknowledges that current perspectives on the texts define femininity as a sort of mindless energy which requires masculine rationality to tame, control, and constructively direct: woman is the object which the subject, man, manipulates in order to create — which effectively “legitimate[s] a sexually imbalanced society where man is to be regarded [by woman] as a god” (Gupta, p. 36). The texts also strongly suggest that Kali — while enraged in protecting the various goddesses — is not a role model for modern women.

However, Gupta points out that more thoughtful translations and interpretations of all the many scriptures offer a view of Kali as the essence of the Brahman: “the all-inclusive Reality that is beyond any form of alienation or separation” (Gupta, p. 37) — which logically allows for women to be perceived as being equally autonomous with men. Indeed, the author feels Kali’s rage can become a powerful symbol for modern women, reflecting “the behavioral reality of a subjugated woman in search of her identity” (Gupta, p. 37) as she seeks independence from personal and cultural oppressions.

The Islamic perspective

I’ve actually been introduced to Riffat Hassan, who wrote “Muslim Women and Post-Patriarchal Islam.” This makes for a curious reading experience: on the one hand I remember a tall, quiet woman with a courteous smile and patient eyes, which made me want to respect and learn from that serene dignity. On the other hand, I am appalled and angered that any woman should have to live through what she describes as the standard Islamic view on women: it is “a self-evident fact that women are not equal to men, who are ‘above’ women or have a ‘degree of advantage’ over them. There is hardly anything in a Muslim woman’s life that is not affected by this belief” (Hassan, p. 43). I want to urge her to escape before this devastating religious rot consumes her heart and soul.

As I read I am impressed with the strength and depth of her research: I feel she demonstrates conclusively that the Qur’an in no way suggests that woman is inferior to man — that, in fact, there is at least one verse with intriguing original use of the “feminine attached pronoun” which suggests the “one original source or being” was female, not male (Hassan, p. 62). Unlike the Bible, there is nothing at all in the Qur’an stating that woman was created after and from man (Hassan, p. 45), or specifically for man (Hassan, p. 52-53), or that woman is responsible for the Fall. The Qur’an, in fact, has no conception of a Fall — instead man was always intended to leave the Garden to become Allah’s “viceregent” on Earth (Hassan, p. 49). It is contamination from Judaism and Christianity which has insinuated these despicable calumnies into current Islamic belief — where, unfortunately, they are now as generally and routinely believed as they are in the other Religions of the Book.

(more tomorrow)