[responing to the strange reversal of values on Facebook, which allows what amount to exploitative images of women, but balks in what someone called "a frat boy mentaltiy" at images of breast feeding or aboriginal women conducting ceremonies]
Somehow all our politicoreligious histories are tied together here, as being influenced by Englisch emigrants. I often remark when there are examples of gratuitous American prudery that many of the original settlers here, the Puritans in particular, left a remarkably sexually repressed England because for them it wasn't repressed enough. Of course on arrival here on our East coast they settled within five miles of a colony of libertines. This kind of set the stage for the interplay of the moral genes of American public thought and private behavior and has been a basic theme with some sprinklings along the way of some other exotic flavors up to the present day.
As Heinlein outlined in his many explorations of possible sexual mores, the chief counterforce to alternative behaviors and styles in this Country has been the inevitable Ms. Grundy in her incarnations as various kinds of moral outrage at anything interesting or even perhaps useful. She brings out the Calvinist decorated lash at any hint of moral turpitude, her judgment being based on an ideology of inexperience and shortsightedness regarding practical realities which only deep religious conviction can bring.
This parochialism can poison life experience well beyond only the sexual matters which are contended. The story comes to mind of the woman who refused to learn a second language when it would have been of great advantage to her. "God writ the Bible in English, so its good enough for me!" she exclaimed when asked about her refusal. And this ignorant refusal is a characteristic of conservatism in general and manifests as the obstruction of anything progressive to the point of heavily promoting one's own detriment. The American Congress and dangerously psychotic clown car of Republican presidential candidates is a current example of going too far down this road.
But the chief problem with this puritanical stance is that it backfires, causing and aggravating the very thing it is meant to prevent. For example, when I was living in Arizona there came on the news one night a story about a Catholic pastor in Norwalk, Connecticut. He was up in arms about the church parking lot being used by the patrons of the nudie bar, the Zebra Club, across the street. He raised such a fuss in a short time about his moral inconvenience regarding the use of his parking lot that it had become national news, and I was hearing about it two-thirds of the way across the land. And there's no doubt that the story reached the opposite coast as well.
As it happened, I moved shortly thereafter to Stamford, CT for a job operating a small printing press. I had friends who lived in Norwalk, and on my way there one day I drove by the site of the contention storied on the newscast I saw in AZ. I was amazed at the number of vehicles around the club, and in the church parking lot. It was a weekday afternoon, so the cars in the parish lot hadn't brought their occupants to Sunday mass. But what struck me, beyond the number of cars, was the number of out-of-state plates on them! There were plates from at least seven adjacent and nearby states! I thought to myself: if the owner of that club has any sense of decency he would give the pastor of the appurtenant church a tithe for his excellent and very productive free advertising!
And thus it is with much of public moral revulsion. Yes, while there are heinous things that deserve our intelligence to be used to quash them, my experience is that most such public hoopla as is aimed at sexual behavior or other moral matters backfires in that it draws more attention to the problem, thus promoting it, as did the good pastor in Norwalk. Here, in nearby Placerville, there are even picketers yet protesting a situation which has been legally and economically gone for months! Such is the ideological mind, one which tends to operate on fear, rather than the circumspect assessment of actual facts and the understanding of human nature as such.
This misplaced furor of moral outrage is often centered on the wonderful phenomenon of women's breasts, which in their biological capacity are a kind of innocent bystanders in the contention surrounding them and how they are used or when they are seen or why. Such silliness extended to their uncovered wonders being of no contention in NatGeo to requiring pasties on images of statuary depicting white women. In the meantime, toddlers and school children feasted on the real thing as they passed them in the towns of Europe so blessed with public art.
We now know that after spending over a trillion fighting the marijuana cartels in Mexico, all we had to do was make it legal here. Now that part of the cartels hardly can do business. And we benefit here with the income that used to go there staying local and we also enjoy the indisputable health benefits of the plant where applicable. And while the main reason for banning weed was economical, its demonization was fueled by emotionalized propaganda. This kind of
"morality" is expensive on many levels.
So is the puritanism surrounding women's breasts. It is symptomatic of a much larger problem, the one manifesting as economic and other inequalities. But mostly it is symptomatic of a pathetic public immaturity about the biology and psychology of sex and relationship. Ultimately it is a failure in self-awareness, and therefore, social awareness, and above all a failure to love. We are not by any means a civilized people. Yes, we have toys, especially of destruction and consumption.
But we have not, on a public scale, the emotional and spiritual maturity to have a sense of proportion about things. We will make a public furor about seeing a breast, and not nearly a large of one about sex trafficking or genital mutilation, or the horrors of child bridery and the raping of women and children in war zones. As is often the case with this kind of false morality, the public priority is bass ackwards. It diverts from actual, real, and urgent issues. The exposure of women's breasts, feeding babies, or in pictures for information or pleasure is not the cover-up we need to be concerned about.
We have far more serious work to do. And it has to do with what wounds have been inflicted on the hearts and minds of millions by our ignorance and greed. We have not yet faced our actual enemy, projecting that on to another gender, Party, or country. Yet we discourage the kind of education and thoughtfulness that would lead to a resolution, an actual way forward, by engaging in mock skirmishes around diversionary bonfires lit well past the periphery of the actual battleground.
Tuesday, March 15, 2016
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment