wavyarms | merry christmas!

Thanks for the privilege list. I'd add one along the lines of "People use my religion to signify someone of high moral character (as in, "That's very Christian of you", or "We're all good Christians here".)"

The same could be said of race, at least in the South (e.g. "That sure is white of you").

Oh absolutely! All of these privilege lists are about majority versus minority in whatever sort you're dealing with that day (religion, race, sexuality, gender....).

I'd have to disagree with a few other "privileges". It seems like whoever wrote this is lumping all branches of Christianity together, ignoring the schisms, disputes, conflicts and emnities among them. Catholics and Protestants have been bitter enemies since the Renaissance: in most countries, whichever side had the power made a point of violently and relentlessly persecuting the other (there are still places *cough*NorthernIreland*cough* where it is potentially fatal to declare one's particular Christianity); Hitler persecuted Catholics, and so did/does the Ku Klux Klan. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is routinely ridiculed, distrusted and discriminated agianst by the popular culture.

As for 1, 7, and 16, the only "Christian" holidays that have made it into the federal calendar — and that most heathens are familiar with — are Christmas and Easter, which are popularly celebrated in ways that have little or nothing to do with the religious aspects of either holiday. Sure, there's a lot of churchgoing for Christians, but the evergreen tree, the lights, the presents, the mistletoe, and the usual refreshments come from Yule, and the rabbit, eggs, and chocolate come from May Day and other similar fertility celebrations. Oh yeah, and Hallowe'en, in popular culture, has been stripped of its religious significance altogether, and doesn't even count as a proper holiday.

Most of the other privileges simply come from being the group in the majority.

First of all, I think having your holidays celebrated in a way that's not necessarily religious is a sign of privilege. Sure, there's the obvious drawbacks of having your beliefs turned into a money-making venture, but there's also the fact that your religion is completely accepted and integrated into your society in a way that's true for no one else. Holiday time off is one big obvious advantage here.

Also, you say "
Most of the other privileges simply come from being the group in the majority" like that's no big thing, when it's kind of the point. Being the group in the majority is one of the major ways one group establishes power over another.

The point I was making about those two holidays is that we'd be celebrating them whether they were Christian or not. As for the power of the majority, that goes for any majority anywhere, and is not exclusive to Christians, was what I was saying.

The point I was making about those two holidays is that we'd be celebrating them whether they were Christian or not.

Now that is absolutely not true. The whole reason those holidays have entered into common social celebration is because they started out as Christian, and Christians have dominated the religious landscape for the past 500 years! That's why that point is on the privilege checklist - we are the majority, and therefore EVERYONE celebrates our holidays, even if they aren't part of our religion!

No, they did not. They started out as pagan, and got assimilated by Christianity, which spread them around. Even the date 25 December was picked because it coincided with the Saturnalia celebrations. And the date of Easter differs between the eastern and western orthodoxy (Eastern Orthodox Christians celebrate Easter on the Monday after the last day of Passover; Catholics and Protestants — and thus Western Europe and the Americas — celebrate Easter on a Sunday calculated by a wholly different timetable.

Yes, the origins of the holidays are true. However, I do not think those holidays would be the dominant, work-force-holiday-dominating forces that they are if it weren't for the Christian influence. I maintain that the relationship of those holidays to Christianity is the reason they are dominant holidays now.

After all, without inter-Christianity-bickering, the Pilgrims might never have come over here, and Native American religions might be the dominant on the continent. I'm pretty sure that they don't have Christmas- and Easter-esque holidays at the center of their religions.

I'm pretty sure that they don't have Christmas- and Easter-esque holidays at the center of their religions.

Possibly not true. Can't say how central, but definately celebrated.

OK, I stand corrected. :)

However, (to nit-pick) if Christmas is just a big winter solstice celebration, and merely overlaid on top of older religions, how come we don't celebrate summer solstice?

I think religions that adopt older religions for their purposes only adopt the parts that are useful (i.e. overlapping) and disregard others. It's interesting how that affects the religions being adopted, even by those practitioners who stick to their original beliefs (i.e. Judaism and Hanukkah.) And even if there are similarities, I think the calendar would look very different if any Native American religion had been dominant for the past 500 years. (As would the map.)

how come we don't celebrate summer solstice?

Agreed. But we do have a summer holiday — it's political, rather than religions, but it happens to fll at the warmest and brightest time of year, and we celebrate it with ripe fruit and summer greens and young fowl and fresh salmon...

Maybe its a coincidence that the 4th of July stuck in the claendar in wyas that Veterans Day or D-Day have't. And maybe its a coincidence that we celebrate strawberry season with shortcake festivals and bazaars, and the Mohicans had an early summer strawberry festival. I think we tend to want to celebrate the seasons of the year in one way or another, and we don't just swipe each other's holidays: if our traditions don't give us a holiday when the rhythms of the year suggest one, then we find one somewhere.

Apparently the current focus on gifts at Chistmas is about a 150 years old; the powers that were wanted to discourage the singing of th wiats — wassailing, pople showing up at their neighors' houses drunk in the small hours, singing for small ale. So they told people to stay home.

When the puritans came over, they didn't believe in celebrating Christmas. Cromwell forbade it — he thought all that Lord of Misrule gender bending and marchepane and mummery was getting out of hand. So Christmas as people mean it in popular culture is a mixed bag, pagan and secular, elements of medieval, and Victorian protestantism.

I see the point: that people don't publicly celebrate Kwansaa and Ramadan and the feast of lights. Tell you the truth, I find the public celebration of Christmas frustrating — it may be a privilege to watch people take a family ritual or a sacred symbol of worship and string it up on a marquee, but it comes at cost.

I did find these food for thought. 18 confuses me — if you write about th privelegs of Christianity, aren't you putting Christianity on trial by definition? Isn't this list a case in point? Also I've been learning a lot this semester about the influence of Calvinist protestantism on our culture. There's a reason I wrote about paganism for my final paper:-)

it may be a privilege to watch people take a family ritual or a sacred symbol of worship and string it up on a marquee, but it comes at cost.

Well, true. And part of the point is that much of the list comes at a cost. If you are making assumptions about other people, that too has a cost.

I mentioned 18 below in my response to

ethicsgradient. (Way, way down.) I think it has to do with the amount of subtlety we are able to handle about different religions. That is, everyone knows Christianity has tons of different religions within it, and people can criticize one aspect of their religion without being accused of being anti-all-of-Christianity. But when people aren't as familiar with various aspects and subtleties of Confucianism, for example, criticisms may be taken to be blanket statements.

Admittedly, it's not one of the more powerful entries on the list. :)

Also, all other branches of religion also have schisms. So another privilege of Christianity is that if you say "I'm Catholic, not Protestant, they're COMPLETELY different" that everyone will understand and respect that, instead of saying, "Oh, you're Muslim. You must hate Israel, then?"

I'm not Christian. I do disagree with some of the points though.

#2: I have a hard time getting past religion other people. I have an immediate negative reaction to it, and I try to fight it. I tend to think that this is worse with Christianity, but maybe that's because I've only known annoying Christians. What it really comes down to is I just don't respect religion.

#6: Those people make me wish I had the road bazooka....especially the giant fish that says "truth" eating the little fish that says "darwin"

#18: is somewhat misleading, as anyone writing potentially critical from inside a group usually gets a bit of a free pass, Christian or otherwise.

#19: I would say that if you are travelling to certain parts of the world today, being a Christian is certainly a liability, but I suppose they mean "domestic travel" here.

#20: Do people assume that rich non Christians are rich due to their religion? Someone explain this one to me.

#24: See #2

#31: I don't understand this one.

#34: I'm also not sure on this one.

Oh yeah, and #33 is more of an accidental majority privilege than a discriminatory one. Supply and demand.

Accidental privileges are just as important as the others.

The point of these lists is not that we should run out and fix them all and we're bad if we don't. The point is to think about the ways in which your life is easier or different from someone else's, because that can inform how you respect other people.

Then they forgot to mention that if you go out into the singles scene, you can find someone who shares your religious beliefs with relative ease.

Though maybe Christians don't frequent the singles scene....

You're right, that's a good one!

Although some Christians wouldn't view it as such - I have a friend who is having trouble finding "a nice Catholic boy." (She's pretty egalitarian - has dated several atheists - but in a life partner, someone who shares her religion is important to her.)

Maybe she should consider a shirt that says: "This body is worth a mass"

You can tell her I said that, in fact.

I'm reading #20 as referring to people who assume all Jews are rich and ready to take over the world. Or something like that.

I was trying to figure out if #31 (taking children away) was something that had been happening to Muslims - but it just occurred to me that it could be talking about Wiccans/pagans. I'll bet CPS has taken away kids from pagans somewhere because "it's not a good home." (I'm guessing, though.)

#34 - curricular materials that testify to the glory of my religion - How about junior high/high school history when you learn about the glorious crusades, and the Muslim infidels? I had to learn about Jewish history in Sunday School, on my own time.

#31 is Native Americans mostly, I think. Good point about wiccans, though.

#34 also relates to Native Americans - good cowboys, innocent settlers trying to settle down attacked by savages, etc.

Absolutely Native Americans! I can't believe I didn't think of that, when I'm within spitting distance of two reservations here.

(Of course, many/most Native Americans here are now Christian, but that's beside the point.)

Well, race/religion/gender/class privileges are all mixed up anyways.

I'm flattered you signal-boosted, and sorry you got slammed. Good luck with the These lists of "privileges" exist to make people aware of their unexamined assumptions thing. Pardon me if I don't jump into the fray, but I don't really think I'll end up producing useful conversation.

(Interesting how one of the common reactions to the subject of privilege is for people to defend their victimizations. "No, no, I'm not privileged - in fact, I'm a victim! Look!")

We now return you to your regularly scheduled snark-free day.

Oh, I can handle it. :)

I showed the list to

galagan (who is a lapsed Catholic) and he started ranting about how when he goes to Rotary meetings here, they pray at the start of the meeting - and when they pray, they pray to Jesus explicitly. Because it wouldn't occur to anyone here that there's a problem with either of those things in a public forum.

Ah, yes, "because it wouldn't occur to anyone."

I'm very glad now that I had some anti-racism training on that cross-country bike trip. Although it was uncomfortable and not always easy to swallow in the beginning, I really feel that it was a valuable thing to learn to stretch my brain cells and think about unquestioned assumptions. That's where I first ran into the Peggy McIntosh article.

Tell

galagan he has my sympathies. Tell him the same thing happens at Westminster graduation. :)

good cowboys, innocent settlers

Hell yes. In this fine upstanding town, we have a series of murals at the PO with mottoes like "relentless progress" and "staunch faith". The one for "cruel adversity" shows a man with a bow and eagle feathers kneeling behind a tree, holding a torch, and a woman standing in the doorway of a log cabin. I'm betting they're not ascribing the cruel adversity to the young mother. It makes me angry every time I have to wait in line there. I'm not alone either; the town sent around a petition three or four years ago to have it painted over, but they couldn't get it passed.

We have a disturbing mural in our post office too! Not as bad as yours, just shows some cowering Indians looking up in awe at a proudly standing white man. Still make me feel squeedgy.

Didn't sanj tell me that Montana state agencies will only allow Christians to adopt children? Maybe I'm misremembering.

Whoa. I have trouble believing that one. It's blatantly unconstitutional, to start with. Do you have references on that one?

See my answer to her. And it's perfectly legal. (more explanation in the linked post.) *sigh*

Wow. That is incredible. Every time I think maybe I'm being too ornery, I find I'm not being ornery enough. *sigh*

Yup. Basically, the two adoption agencies in the state are Catholic Social Services and Lutheran Social Services, and they get to set their own guidelines for eligibility. I went to a training about adoption and was appalled when I discovered this (and ~~wrote~~) ranted about it here). While I do resepct each agency's right to set their own guidelines and restrictions, I think it's narrow-minded. As I think I wrote then - even my *mother* (who is a pretty good mom) doesn't qualify, under this. And that seems Wrong Wrong Wrong to me.

Thank the gods I was able to reproduce on my own!

#31--A judge tried to take kids away from pagan divorcing parents. He got smack laid down on him. And rightly.

Well, let's see if I can take these on.

#2: I have the same reaction you do, although I try to be conscious of it and fight it as well. However, we are in Cambridge - remember Texas? How many of your neighbors there would have shared your reaction?

#6: But how often are those cars vandalized?

#18: I don't think I agree with you here. Because so many people are Christian, Christianity is viewed as a large and complex subject. Therefore, a Christian criticizing aspects of the religion from within in a subtle manner can usually be sure of being understood, and not just trashing Christianity as a whole. But people don't have the same complex grasp of Islam, and in their lives, it's not as huge a subject. So someone who is Muslim, writing in the US or England (which is where this particular checklist applies) will not have as easy a time. If they write about certain subtle things within their religion they disagree with, they run a very big risk of having people outside their religion say "See? Even Muslims think Islam sucks!" and having people inside their religion say "You jerk - we have enough problems already, we have to present a united front to the outside world."

#19: I think being Muslim is a much bigger liability, even outside of the US and Europe, though you're right that that's where the primary difficulties would lie. But I would say that Muslims have a harder time in the US than Christians have in the Arab world, though I'm unqualified to say that - it's just my opinion. I cite this article as a source.

#20: Jews often have to contend with the accusation that they're only rich because they're Jewish, and "all those Jews stick together". Or somesuch.

#24: Yes, I mentioned in my original post that I also disagreed with this one. But again, that might be because we're in a liberal area of the country.

#31: This intersects with race, and refers primarily to Native Americans, who for a substantial portion of US history had their children taken from them and put into schools. Same happened to the Aborigines in Australia.

#34: How much did you learn about Islam in school? Or Judaism? Any famous Buddhists? What about famous Hindus? This ties into the concentration of history around Europe and America. Obviously it's a complex ball of interdependency - Europe oppresses non-Christian religions, so non-Christians don't rise to positions of power, so they don't make the history books.

Oops. The article I meant, and totally failed, to cite for #19 is here:
http://www.majority.com/news/salon30.htm (http://www.majority.com/news/salon30.htm).

Wait, I just wrote that comment, but now I'm not sure I understand this list....I'll grant that many of those items might be a examples of privilege. I guess the list, by existing, is meant to indicate that these are privileges that Christians in today's America enjoy. When I take issue with certain of them, I'm taking issue with the second idea, and not the first.

However, some of those points, such as ones like "I can express my religion without fear of blah" are more religious equality privileges, while something like "I can assume that 100% of my elected officials share my religion" is a little different.

I think it's not so much what kind of privilege stuff is. The privilege lists are a list of things that can be mostly assumed, stuff that the privileged don't have to waste a lot of time/energy/thought on if they don't want to. So I just don't have to think about a lot of things because I'm white. It's all about the luxury of not having to think about certain things.

I tend to read them as two types--privileges that should be universal and 'given' to everyone, and unfortunately often aren't (I can express my religion without fear of blah) and privileges that aren't positive (I am free to ignore other points of view).

I wonder if the fact that I celebrate a secular Christmas and a pagan (religious) Solstice is more irritating to Christmaspersecutioniks than it would be if I didn't celebrate Christmas at all.

...I need a Christmas icon.

We could just modify that icon and put a Santa hat on it. :P

As a random thing, I was thinking about your comment last night about my Solstice Shrub/Christmas Tree--that it's not like it's a Christian thing, really. And I wasn't sure I agreed...because the original use of a thing is kind of not equivalent to its current symbolism after centuries of use. Because a tradition was *originally* pagan doesn't outweigh the fact that for the past couple centuries, it's been so thoroughly associated with Christianity as to be a Christian tradition. I think that the weight of origin doesn't erase the associations that come with use.

On the other hand, I spoke with a Russian Jewish woman tonight who said that all her family, when they immigrated, were used to having New Year trees--and that in the US, it's kind of frowned upon for a Jew to have a tree up for the winter holidays, so they felt they couldn't really have one.

So now I don't know what I think.

I'm not sure which comment I made about that, but I agree with your first paragraph.

However, tell the Russian Jewish woman to have a tree if she wants, and hang what the neighbors think!

merry christmas!

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Taking issue

Re: Taking issue

Re: Taking issue

Re: Taking issue

Re: Taking issue

Re: Taking issue

A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: A few thoughts/ideas

Re: Taking issue

Re: Taking issue

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject