Gender Pluralism and Misogyny

At the Center for Pluralism, we will explore if misogyny is religiously sanctioned or men took it upon themselves to make things to work for them. The unintended consequence of such acts was making a villain out of God and religion.

A few Men tend to be insecure about their own worth compared to women and devise ways to feel secure by causing women to be vulnerable. I am not talking about the Taliban in a distant land, but our own Taliban mindset here in America who deny women the right to choose what she does with her body, rejecting her equal pay, and expect her to defer her to her husband.

"A woman should behave like a woman" "Her place is home" echo the insecure religious men from Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist and other traditions.

Women have put up with this crap from men far too long, and it's time we feel, act, talk and behave like equals. The silence of the right people is considered an endorsement to the right-wing views on women. The majority needs to speak up continuously. 

An excellent functional society strives to be just to every citizen when justness becomes a norm in every aspect of life - be it between spouses, family members, members of the community, town, state, and the nation, then people trust each other and mind their own business and let others be free from tensions.

Don't look to any one group to blame, look at yourselves first. A sentence that I have been repeating lately is "for every Muslim ass; there is a Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh or other ass" add hole if you want to.

Eventually, we need to realize that individuals must be held accountable for their wrongdoing, and not their religion.

I believe everything on the earth is created to seek its balance, whether it is matter or individual, family or a nation. Everyone struggles to have that elusive equilibrium which goes off balance as regularly as it is desired to be in balance.

For years, Islam has been at the forefront of receiving the accusations, but when I study Islam, it is not the religion, it is the men. The Christians find it convenient to blame the Old Testament, instead of doing the research and seeing what God meant.

Prophet Muhammad had time and again said, "Justice:" among people, within the family, among nations and tribe is the key to building a prosperous, cohesive society where no one has to live in fear of the other.

The other word for Islam would be Justice that is not what you see in the world today. Neither do you see Jesus's teachings practiced by Christians or Jews follow Torah or Bhagavad Gita by Hindus?

To me all religions are equally beautiful and divine; no religion is superior or inferior to any. If any on claims superiority, he or she does not understand the nature of his or her faith. Religion is not about arrogance which kills relationships and balance in the society, but it is about humility, that which builds bridges between people.

Dr. Mike Ghouse is committed to building a cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. His new book, the “American Muslim Agenda” is about everything you wanted to know about Muslims. The book is available at Xlibris and Amazon. Mike is a public speaker, author, interfaith wedding officiant, and the executive director of the Center for Pluralism in Washington, DC. More about him at https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeghouse/

Gender Pluralism:: Ending the gender binary

GENDER PLURALISM - ENDING THE GENDER BINARYURL -

As a humanitarian and a social scientist, I welcome this decision by the supreme court of India to include Transgender in "all men are created equal". We have ways to go, but this is a moment of celebration, celebrating the right to be who you are.

Mike Ghouse
www.FoundationforPluralism.com
# # #

Gender Pluralism:: Ending the gender binary
Courtesy of THE HINDU newspaper.
Chapal Mehra

— Photo: Meeta Ahlawat BROAD DEFINITION: With the Supreme Court's verdict, gender has come to mean individual choice and experience rather than what is socially acceptable. 

 Challenging the dominant view

With this judgment, the Court has challenged the dominant view of gender identity. In a society that has focused on a binary, this is revolutionary. In this judgment, the court recognises that “individual experience” of gender is one of the most fundamental aspects of “self-determination, dignity and freedom.” Further the judgment relates the right to freedom of expression to one’s right to express one’s self-identified gender. Thus, the idea of gender is transformed from social acceptability to individual choice and experience.

The judgment is significant in many other ways as well. By ending the gender binary, the Court has opened the discussion on the rights of marriage, adoption and inheritance for the transgender community. The judgment also recognises the community’s position as a socially and economically backward category, and directs the state for appropriate affirmative action. More specifically, it directs the state to provide the community access to health services and even separate toilets.

For India’s transgender community, it is their first encounter with equality in a democratic framework. At the same time, this thoughtful, inclusive judgment is significant for all Indians, especially minorities. It comes at a time when India’s political parties are engaged in a vitriolic confrontation over minorities and their rights. The Court’s interpretation — of justice, equality, freedom and dignity and the role of the state — should remind our political class that the rights of Indian citizens, irrespective of gender or sexual orientation, are safeguarded by the Constitution. The judges quote Aristotle, Kant, Rawls and Amartya Sen to create a broader narrative on justice — something extremely relevant to this election.

Despite the euphoria, the judgement is not without problems. A broad sweep of identities neglects many identities. Also, the procedures for implementation lie with the States and the Centre. Interestingly, it also evades extensive comment on Section 377 which criminalises sex between homosexuals, which the judges term as a “colonial legacy.” It remains to be seen how this judgment will interact with the petition on Section 377, to be considered soon. Rationally, it will be difficult to give citizens the right to choose their gender but not the right to choose who they love. The Court’s decision on Section 377 will tell us whether the highest court in the land can live with deeply contradictory ideas of justice, freedom, and equality.

Yet, the process of change will now be irreversible. Just as law can manufacture intolerance, it can also create gradual social acceptance. Social attitudes may not transform overnight but Indian society only needs to look at its own history of inclusiveness. The transgender community was, until the advent of colonialism, a respected section of society. The Hindu Right should note that transgenders are mentioned in the Ramayana, and that it is Ram who gives them the power to bless important occasions such as childbirth and marriage. Also, Shiva’s Ardhanarishwar form is well-known and widely worshipped.

The role of the British

The tradition is not limited to Hinduism alone. Islamic, Jain and other cultures have also included the transgender community and other sexual minorities. The famous Sufi saint, Bulle Shah, dressed as a woman to please his master and often danced with eunuchs. Yet all this changed when India was colonised. The Indian Penal Code enacted by the British recognised only two genders, creating a binary that never existed.

Over time, these constructs were absorbed in Indian society. The community has since faced extreme forms of violence for not conforming to socially dictated gender identities. This violence often happens within families and communities, where transgenders face abuse, discrimination, disinheritance and abandonment. This judgment will hopefully begin to alter this in some measure.

Despite its many flaws and the incremental nature of this change, this is a moment of celebration not just for India’s transgender community or its sexual minorities but for all minorities. In a deeply fractured democracy, the Court has safeguarded the right to individual choice and freedom. It is reassuring for every Indian that despite our debasing politics, justice, equality and individual liberty — ideas that define India — will be safeguarded, and the right to choose our identity will go beyond the binary.

(Chapal Mehra in an independent New Delhi-based writer.) 

Jimmy Carter: How religion subjugates women

I have always been a great admirer of President Jimmy Carter, a great humanist. This is a good article to read and reflect. Mike Ghouse

The former president speaks out against doctrine used to promote misogyny and abuse. Are you listening, Obama?

Courtesy: Salon

Topics: Religion, Broadsheet, Life News

“The Words of God Do Not Justify Cruelty to Women“: That’s the title of an Op-Ed that ran in the U.K. Observer earlier this week. It wasn’t written by a feminist theologian like Karen Armstrong or one of the women on President Obama’s faith-based council — but by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter.

In the article, Carter explains his painful decision to split with the Southern Baptist Church “when the convention’s leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be ‘subservient” to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.”

Carter left the Souther Baptists in 2000, when he was 76. He was writing this Op-Ed as one of a dozen world leaders organized two years ago by Nelson Mandela. The Elders, as they call themselves are, well, older and out of public office. They bring their stature and wisdom to the intractable, often unpopular political issues of our time and seek not to solve them but to make them more visible. They are the people many of us have come to love — Desmond Tutu, Muhammad Yunus, Kofi Annan, men with sweet demeanors and nice smiles and real records of changing the world. Some of the world’s strongest and most accomplished women are part of the group, too: Gro Brundtland, Mary Robinson, Aung San Suu Kyi, Graca Machel and Ela Bhatt, who has organized self-employed women workers in India into a powerful force for change.

Now they are taking on religious and traditional practices that harm women. And they chose Jimmy Carter to issue the opening salvo. Carter, it has been said, is a better man than he was president, and he has been proving it since he left office. He’s gotten better with the passage of time. Carter once fired Bella Abzug, whom he had appointed to head his National Advisory Committee on Women. And as a Southern Baptist and Sunday school teacher, he never seemed much interested in women. But 10 years ago, when the Southern Baptist Convention definitively ruled out equality for women and blamed us for original sin, he up and quit the church.
Carter pulls no punches in his Op-Ed. Religious discrimination against women has, he says, “provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women’s equal rights across the world for centuries. The male interpretations of religious texts and the way they interact with, and reinforce, traditional practices justify some of the most pervasive, persistent, flagrant and damaging examples of human rights abuses.” He continues: ”The truth is that male religious leaders have had — and still have — an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter.”

Carter and the Elders are equal-opportunity critics. No country or religion, no practices go uncriticized. Discriminatory religious beliefs are described as “repugnant.” They are used to excuse “slavery, forced prostitution, genital mutilation.” They cost women and girls “control over their own bodies and lives.”

Carter touches on some of the most important aspects of discrimination that have an impact on development and poverty, noting that many women “face enormous and unacceptable risks in pregnancy and childbirth because their basic health needs are not met.” The fact that over a half a million women die each year from preventable conditions during pregnancy and childbirth is one of the continuing tragedies of poor international leadership.

Islam does not escape criticism as Carter notes that “In some Islamic nations, women are restricted in their movements, punished for permitting the exposure of an arm or ankle, deprived of education, prohibited from driving a car or competing with men for a job. If a woman is raped, she is often most severely punished as the guilty party in the crime.”

The U.S. is not let off the hook, either. Carter links the flawed conservative interpretation of scripture to the kind of “discriminatory thinking … behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in Britain and the United States.”

The big question is whether Carter’s message will get much play at the White House. Past efforts by the former president have not had much traction. For Obama, who has indicated a commitment to women’s rights worldwide but who has approached religion with great deference, there is much to ponder in Carter’s message.

Women’s equality cannot be achieved without stepping on the toes of traditional interpretations of women’s lack of rights that permeate the world’s — and Christianity’s — texts. Carter gets it: “I understand, however, why many political leaders can be reluctant about stepping into this minefield. Religion, and tradition, are powerful and sensitive areas to challenge.”

His Op-Ed closes with the following words: “We are calling on all leaders to challenge and change the harmful teachings and practices, no matter how ingrained, which justify discrimination against women. We ask, in particular, that leaders of all religions have the courage to acknowledge and emphasise the positive messages of dignity and equality that all the world’s major faiths share. “

Let’s hope our Obama and his faith-based council are listening.

Frances Kissling is a visiting scholar at the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. She is the former president of Catholics for a Free Choice. More Frances Kissling.