Gubbar, Gud och kvinnor
Oh look, people are reading Does God Hate Women? in the rest of Europe. Someone in Sweden and someone in the Netherlands – in Trouw no less.
I can kind of tell that Elma Drayer in Trouw likes it – she calls it a hilarious pamphlet, which in my book means she likes it. If I’m not mistaken she likes the point we make about the Vatican’s justification for saying all clergy have to be male, which is that all Jesus’s disciples were male; we point out that they all spoke Aramaic, too, but that’s not a requirement for being a priest, and it’s not obvious why maleness should be either, apart of course from the fact that clerical males want to retain their monopoly. I see Jesus and all men and disciples and something about speaking Aramaic in there, so that must be what she’s referring to. But I know some of you out there are Dutch-speakers, so if you would like to translate for me, do go right ahead!
Are any of you Swedish-speakers? I’m not sure – I know there are some readers in Norway, and some Danish-speakers, but I’m not sure about Swedish. I have no idea what the Swedish review says – it probably hates it. Luther’s revenge.
As far as I can make out from the Google translation, the Swedish reviewer doesn’t hate it though, it is a little difficult to be certain.
He does describe you as “amerikansk filosof.” I haven’t come across the word shrill in the translation.
Hi Ophelia
I am admittedly Danish rather than Swedish, but Danish and Swedish are rather close so I have attemted a translation. If there are any Swedish readers they might of course be able to produce a more accurate translation but as a first rough attempt it should be ok.
Men, God and Women
Does God Hate Women? It is rather the attitude to women among the men who sat and wrote their considerations about women which is awry writes Lars Åberg.
Ophelia Benson, American philosopher, and Jeremy Stangroom, British Sociologist, call their new book “Does God hate women?”, but as God is mainly characterised by his absence the question about abstract hate against women becomes a little irrelevant.
It is rather about the attitude to women amongst the men who a very long time ago sat in the desert and wrote down their considerations and recommendations cut off from other people and continents and who despite the fact that incredibly many years have gone by and the knowledge about the Earth and its creation and its inhabitants have grown exceptionally are still believed and literally read by millions of people. Not least those who through an ideological uniform wish to make half of humanity invisible continue to give the structural discrimination an everyday expression.
Benson and Stangroom focus on what the holy books actually say about women’s position in the family and society and as such becomes unwelcome reading for those, from Salt Lake City to Islamabad via Malmö, who claim that submission is a free choice.
Institutions and the media in Sweden continues, as cat around hot porridge, to skirt in a self censored empathetic way around a clear discussion about Islam’s view on women, and in this in a society so long engaged in issues of equality, of universal suffrage and family planning to equal pay and shared parental responsibility.
The present special treatment of conservative religious special demands is actually antidemocratic and strengthens those forces who claim that God should become a part of the lawgiving institutions, that a woman is only half a person, at most, and that other people’s freedom of expression is a nuisance.
I have no idea what the Swedish review says – it probably hates it. Luther’s revenge.
Not at all!
I’m not a native speaker either, but may I suggest a small clarification to PF’s excellent translation: “creation” may be confusing – it’s just plain “origin”.
(lysa med sin frånvaro is a wonderful expression, by the way: ‘shining with his/her/its absence’)
I have little to add to PF’s excellent translation. For anyone wondering, the newspaper “Sydsvenskan”
(“The Southernly Swede”) is considered independent/liberal by Scandinavian standards.
Cassanders
In Cod we trust
The Dutch article speaks about how the author read an article with the title “women climb up in the Vatican”, which she at first misread as “Women climb on top of the Vatican”.
Turns out that the Vatican employs up to about 20% women nowadays, even in higher level functions. Of course, women will never get the really important functions, since they can’t be ordained. The main argument for that still appears to be “That’s how Jesus wanted it.”
Here’s a more complete translation of the paragraph that your book was mentioned in:
The rest of the article discusses that the Catholic Church’s misogyny doesn’t seem to get much attention. Only a small group (womenpriests.org) are still struggling to change the Catholic Church. It mentions the decree that automatically excommunicates anyone involved in ordaining women. In contrast, a Holocaust denier got his excommunication repealed. Apparently women are scarier than Holocaust deniers. The article ends with the suggestion that perhaps it’d be time to actually climb onto the Vatican’s roof.
Sigh. This makes me yearn to be able to read Dutch and Swedish.
Thank you for the translations and reports.
Many thanks!
That’s Jeremy, not “James” and Aramaic, not “Armenian.”
@Marie-Therese: there probably would be enough support within the Catholic Church for a protest action. I’ve known many Catholics who didn’t agree with one or more important bits of Catholic dogma, like their stand on abortion or condoms, as well as their idea of the role of women in the church.
Unfortunately, they don’t seem to understand that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, and doesn’t really have a way to be changed from the bottom up. Yet they won’t leave the Church either, nor will they stop considering themselves “Catholic”. I don’t really get it.
Glad to hear that your book is getting recognition. I don’t have it yet, but look forward to fixing that soon.
I’m also glad to see that someone has been able to help you with a translation. My only exposure to Dutch was six weeks working in a small lab with a Dutch speaking intern. At the end of that time I still couldn’t pronounce screwdriver without making him giggle. I’ve always hoped that he learned more engineering than I learned Dutch.
I think I learned to say als du blieft and dank u when I was being a tourist in the Netherlands – but I probably got them wrong.
Aye, there would indeed be enough support out there within the RC church sphere to protest – but where would they get if they decided to protest against dogma’s of the church – I would surmise, not very far at all. The church is ever so powerful and has ways and means of silencing them and will use its own propaganda to get back at them, if they do not toe the RC line. It has manipulated educated women as well as non-educated women throughout history and it will continue until eternity to do so. And guess what, if one becomes vociferous and dogmatic in voicing their angst against the church and its teachings and other wrongful practices they in turn are reprimanded not only by Catholics but also ex-catholics. Once a catholic always a catholic.
@ Deen. Hey, check out this new site out sometime. The Ryan Report is one of the main reasons as to its existence. http://www.countmeout.ie/
Catholics are so brainwashed from baptism, just after birth and onwards, that it would be very difficult for them to stop considering themselves as catholics – even when they grow up and discover kit to the contrary.
Once a catholic always a catholic.
Sorry, but are you saying ex-catholics still support the church? Which is wrong, because I’m an ex-mick and I am hold the RC in contempt (but not ordinary Catholics – not all in any case -, as it’s stupid to hold hostages responsible for being made hostage without their consent), or are you saying only women never stop being Catholic which seems quite sexist, and Catherine Deveny who writes in the Age here in Melbourne is the counter example to show your universal quantifier is invalid.
Correction, I meant to say “are you saying all ex-catholics still support the church” which seems to be the scope your comment…
In relation to the church manipulating women I was thinking in terms of religious women of the habit. Throughout the world these mostly educated women are bullied by the patriarchical church. If they try to become radical in their thinking they are ‘put down’ at once by it and are forced to remain almost voiceless. They are merely housekeepers, metaphorical wives, office skivvies, educators in helping to reinforce brainwashing catholic teaching to children, nurses, nannies and even lovers.
Some, obviously not all ex-catholics, still support the RC church against the wrongdoings of the clergy and religious, rather than the teachings. Sorry not to have made it more clearer. I think it has more to do with with misplaced loyalties on the part of some ex-catholics. Pathetic. They even use the “witch-hunt” terminology against those who stand up for their rights. They are akin to those ‘nice’ atheists, in my estimation.
Maria-Therese, sorry for assuming your comment was more general. We probably have nothing to argue with. I was raised catholic, but I didn’t understand for a second this “loss” that not believing in cod represents.