Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Posit: Female equality has a long way to go in Buddhism
So since women got a taste of rights, they want more rights than men? So that means that we should be a bit reserved in what rights we give women so that GOD FORBID they don't want equality.
I'm confused who various comments are referring to.
So since women got a taste of rights, they want more rights than men? So that means that we should be a bit reserved in what rights we give women so that GOD FORBID they don't want equality.
I'm sorry if I said something wrong. Fortunately wrong views can be changed. But usually not overnight. I have changed my views on some things as I realize them to be hurtful or unskillful. Why would I want to look like an idiot to women? What do I get for that?
Well, this thread is not supposed to be about monastery rules, but about female equality in Buddhism. And I know that my posts played a part in that. It's interesting, though, that the OP has not really, genuinely yet spoken but only helped stir the fires.
Unfortunately people are "kinda" vilifying people like myself who come from a different background and see things through different colored lenses. But we all see things through different colored lenses. For my part, I don't see where I've insulted anyone, but I realize that people often take offense where none is intended.
NOBODY sees things objectively, save in mathematics and to a large degree in a lot of sciences. Monks are no exception, either. To hear some women here hear "Temptress" where something closer to "complication" is meant IS a bit of surprise to me, frankly. I guess I must just be an evil person, or at least a person with poisoned mind??? NOPE!
As a person interested in politics, I see the most bizarre concatenations of ideas present in people (especially on the Right), that I am stupefied. But I realize, as in tastes, there's simply no accounting for what people think.
I do register my surprise at the emotional baggage, albeit light, being brought into this forum —a forum which should be about engaging with ideas and trying to understand them, rather than dismissing them as jaded ideas due to the way things strike one's ears. Maybe a little humility about one's hearing acumen might be in store?
I think it's a fair statement to make that most people at many times in their lives can only put their thinking down in rather awkward terms, anyhow. Jump on their awkward expressions and then... communication stops.
I've pretty much finished with what I said above in my first post:
I'd start off with the scales. They are simply not made of objective stuff. Equality is a bland, abstract term which exists as a mental construct only... ......... .........
Nor am I sure that women "catching up with" the ranks of Buddhist teachers would necessarily be desirable, for then it might tilt the other way —as in some mainline Protestant churches in the USA. That might cause an upheaval that might well disturb some fundaments. Now don't @stupid me on this paragraph, anyone. This is not the gist of this here post of mine. Hint! This is a side-point...
For me the real issue is whether the Teachers and the followers are the Real Thing. That's all that matters. But, on the other hand, I do find women much richer in Practical Wisdom than men are. Aristotle taught about the two branches of wisdom, Theoretical Wisdom and Practical Wisdom. I've long observed how much more Practical Wisdom Women have than men. Of course, saints and avatars such as Buddha, Sri Ramakrishna, and Jesus exemplify practical wisdom, but their male followers tended not to "catch" that gentle breeze.
except that
I cannot predict the future or be responsible for actions not my own in present time. And though I think the practical wisdom that women are so very rich in would immensely benefit the Buddhist community if each genuine teacher, regardless of gender, would not be hindered by any system, I cannot say that I believe 50/50 parity is a justice issue, nor should ever be confused with human rights.
BUT people, even those in their 90s, do continue to develop throughout life. Bring me along further with kindness, not with spitting bitter tastes from your mouths.
...It's interesting, though, that the OP has not really, genuinely yet spoken but only helped stir the fires.
...
First, I'm glad to see you admit that there's a fire to be stirred.
The reason I haven't spoken out yet...although the very topic and original post ought to give you an idea of where I'm coming from...is that I wanted to let the ensuing posts tell the story. And they have.
I posted this topic after an online conversation with a friend.
Logically, about 50% of world Buddhists are women. I would guess that -- worldwide -- women in any form of leadership role in Buddhist temples and organizations make up less than 1-2% of Buddhist leadership. Would we accept that in any other non-religious field?
Our forum is overwhelmingly male oriented. Why? Do women not feel on an equal footing here?
I have probably visited 2,000 or more Buddhist temples in Thailand, not to mention Burma, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia. Number of women I have seen in those temples in any form of leadership role = 0. Number of mae chee (Buddhist nuns) I have seen in those temples = perhaps 25.
We can rant and rave on this forum about justice for gay people, people with mental health issues, Bradley Manning, and just about any other group of people who are unequal...but rarely is the issue about Buddhist women being in a subservient role mentioned. What is the old saying about cleaning one's own house first?
@vinlyn could it be possible that this is a cultural rather than a religious problem? Meaning, the problem isn't exactly 'buddhism' but rigid cultures under which the religion grew? For example, the Islam of Pakistan is entirely different from the Islam of Dubai - the latter is progressive, the former is not. Both are Islam, so why the difference? Culture.
I used to be Muslim, and I remember when my family and I would go to the mosque on sundays to pray and women would pray on the 1st floor and men prayed on the 2nd floor.
...It's interesting, though, that the OP has not really, genuinely yet spoken but only helped stir the fires.
...
First, I'm glad to see you admit that there's a fire to be stirred.
The reason I haven't spoken out yet...although the very topic and original post ought to give you an idea of where I'm coming from...is that I wanted to let the ensuing posts tell the story. And they have.
I posted this topic after an online conversation with a friend.
Logically, about 50% of world Buddhists are women. I would guess that -- worldwide -- women in any form of leadership role in Buddhist temples and organizations make up less than 1-2% of Buddhist leadership. Would we accept that in any other non-religious field?
Our forum is overwhelmingly male oriented. Why? Do women not feel on an equal footing here?
I have probably visited 2,000 or more Buddhist temples in Thailand, not to mention Burma, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia. Number of women I have seen in those temples in any form of leadership role = 0. Number of mae chee (Buddhist nuns) I have seen in those temples = perhaps 25.
We can rant and rave on this forum about justice for gay people, people with mental health issues, Bradley Manning, and just about any other group of people who are unequal...but rarely is the issue about Buddhist women being in a subservient role mentioned. What is the old saying about cleaning one's own house first?
I think some of that is due to the influence patriarchy has had on many societies and cultures around the world, particularly when it comes to leadership roles; but I also think that things are changing. The last two lay/meditation groups I've been a part of are led by women, both of them fairly large and successful. Beyond that, female monastics are also making a comeback, especially in the West. I was a student of Ayya Tathaaloka's when I used to live in California, and she was encouraged by her teacher, Ajahn Prasert, to open her own monastic retreat centre.
As for the rest, I I think you're exaggerating just a bit. We talk about these kinds of issues fairly often.
@vinlyn could it be possible that this is a cultural rather than a religious problem? Meaning, the problem isn't exactly 'buddhism' but rigid cultures under which the religion grew? For example, the Islam of Pakistan is entirely different from the Islam of Dubai - the latter is progressive, the former is not. Both are Islam, so why the difference? Culture.
Yes to that paradigm, betaboy: the hegemony of cultural attitudes and norms and the mentalities imbued therein. Every institution, every workplace, and every tribe has a kind of mentality. And these cannot change overnight.
I think some of that is due to the influence patriarchy has had on many societies and cultures around the world, particularly when it comes to leadership roles; but I also think that things are changing. The last two lay/meditation groups I've been a part of are led by women, both of them fairly large and successful. Beyond that, female monastics are also making a comeback, especially in the West. I was a student of Ayya Tathaaloka's when I used to live in California, and she was encouraged by her teacher, Ajahn Prasert, to open her own monastic retreat centre.
As for the rest, I I think you're exaggerating just a bit. We talk about these kinds of issues fairly often.
Jason, I think you're somehow missing the point here. I may be wrong but I think it's a matter of whether a crusade analogous to the Anti-Apartheid movement is needed in the East. It's not about the West, I think.
Vinlyn, I still don't understand the contempt people feel for the idea of male monasteries being closed to women. I believe that is quite another issue. After all, in the United States there are plenty of places for women only where men are not allowed, but it is only in sports where women are barred from men's teams. Women reporters are allowed into the locker rooms, though. And these places I've just alluded to are secular establishments, not cloisters. I just don't get this and I just no longer care how much people on NewBuddhist hate me for trying to understand things.
For the record....I am here everyday, usually interacting with you guys/men....and I don't see it as a problem. When something ruffles my feathers...afa....being sexist goes...I speak my mind, and then we all move on, haha. Depends on if I feel like going there...haha.
Am I outnumbered? Yes. For a bucket load of reasons. Whatever. I'm over it.
No MAJOR girlie pic shows......talk is never raunchy.....jokes don't seem to cross the line... Everyone is pretty respectful of me here... Buddhism is the main topic.....cultural/time/society material cannot be helped... ....sad, I know. .
@vinlyn could it be possible that this is a cultural rather than a religious problem? Meaning, the problem isn't exactly 'buddhism' but rigid cultures under which the religion grew? ...
Vinlyn, I still don't understand the contempt people feel for the idea of male monasteries being closed to women. I believe that is quite another issue. After all, in the United States there are plenty of places for women only where men are not allowed, but it is only in sports where women are barred from men's teams. Women reporters are allowed into the locker rooms, though. And these places I've just alluded to are secular establishments, not cloisters. I just don't get this and I just no longer care how much people on NewBuddhist hate me for trying to understand things.
I'm not clear where I have ever talked about monasteries being closed to women. I did talk about parts of temples being closed to women. If there were also "female monasteries", at least that could separate but equal. But there is not even that to any significant extent.
Where are all these places where women bar men? You mean like a womens club? There are also mens clubs. But a small social group -- assuming that is what you are talking about -- is kind of irrelevant, as compared to an international religion.
Where are all these places where women bar men? You mean like a womens club? There are also mens clubs. But a small social group -- assuming that is what you are talking about -- is kind of irrelevant, as compared to an international religion.
Well I live in the South. A woman can get a haircut anywhere, can execise anywhere, can attend any meeting... Men's clubs beyond hunting and fishing expeditions out in the open?
I don't understand you in the least very often, though, I must say, Vinlyn. I also must say that most of the people who know me find me very transparent and uncomplicated. "Simple" is one common description. "Adult Child" another. But mostly the Southern "You won't do!"
I guess you all ignored @neithers post where he wrote that feminists want more rights than men, and women had a relaxing time being housewifes in the 50s.
I mean since you know some women being buddhists, then that must be empirical evidence that the leadership is 50/50.
And also @nirvana who thinks it will disturb the fundaments of buddhism if we have more women leaders there. I mean... Just like in My country where we had a female bishop who was dearly loved and invited random people for a cup of tea in her house. It was SO disturbing that now we have more female priests who are awesome, a long with gay priests. People love them
Well, as the son of a retired Episcopal priest, I can see how membership in the church and attendance have plummeted. Hopefully it will recover or regroup in my lifetime, as I love the Anglican communion dearly. The climate of the church has changed, it's a completely different place, and its older members are drifting away in droves. The younger people are going to the evangelical churches and the church that I once loved for "worshipping the Lord in the beauty of holiness" has become a noisy place now almost entirely given over to "program" having little to do with holy religion.
The past depth and breadth are gone and even the mysticism of the hymns is being edited out in places.
Just saying what I see happening. But everyone has his or her perspective.
If buddhism cant take women leaders then me and more women will not take part of it. And it is purely selfish of you to say that humans (because that is what women are) will disturb a religion by participating in a greater role.
No, the seminaries have at least a 70% female to 30% male ratio, as far as students. I think the faculty is perhaps about split, except in areas where faculty women outnumber faculty men. And where I live all of the priests are women and some of them let the laity do all or most of the preaching. It's really sad for those of us used to a more robust churchmanship. Hopefully just a phase of readjustment.
Just remember not all us men are so blind or insensitive.
I am.
In the future people may well alter their gender as easily as gender x http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24767225 Kids may reorient before deciding which way to be. Some may eventually decide to be reassigned to a new species. Perhaps a dolphin.
The question is are dolphins capable of being Buddhas? 'What's that Flipper? Can you jump through the hoop for all the boys and girls?'
Such a long thread, I've skimmed most of it so forgive me if I repeat anyone's point.
Separating the sexes seems to happen in most religions, and it's generally accepted as a good thing to avoid the distraction of sexuality. But no one has yet convinced me there is anything innately wrong with sex. Why is celibacy so prized among monastics? Surely it is wrong to view the world in terms of temptations that must be avoided at all costs?
For the record....I am here everyday, usually interacting with you guys/men....and I don't see it as a problem. When something ruffles my feathers...afa....being sexist goes...I speak my mind, and then we all move on, haha. Depends on if I feel like going there...haha.
Am I outnumbered? Yes. For a bucket load of reasons. Whatever. I'm over it.
No MAJOR girlie pic shows......talk is never raunchy.....jokes don't seem to cross the line... Everyone is pretty respectful of me here... Buddhism is the main topic.....cultural/time/society material cannot be helped... ....sad, I know. .
Well, just for the record, a short time ago, I was involved in a somewhat 'heated' discussion, on this forum, mainly with just one or two others (males). Now, believe me, I have moved on, and I'm not holding a grudge; as a matter of fact, I can't even remember the topic we were discussing- really, it wasn't that long ago, but I have no interest in looking it up...
Anyway, instead of angrily, heatedly, or passionately disagreeing with my *opinion* about something, (whatever it was), I was instead treated to several snide and insulting comments about it being "that time of the month" or that perhaps I was experiencing "women's issues" or words to that effect; and a couple of other stereotypical female put downs....
My opinion wasn't being countered with another explanation or opinion - my gender was being called into question as "irrational" or unstable. That was not only uncalled for, but simply not nice, at all.
The way I was spoken to was childish and disrespectful, AND, it was gender related, not fact related. I admit, I reacted badly. I should have just let it go- but maybe it was because I was recovering -right at that very time- from major surgery, (a hysterectomy; you know, "lady problems") and not feeling well, I was a bit more sensitive than I usually would be. So without thinking, I lowered myself to their level and spat back words that got me in trouble here... and reprimanded. The other person? No warning, no problem; and not one person here, male or female stepped up and said "hey now, that wasn't very nice" to the person insulting one of the very few women who still participate on this forum.
::: shrugs::: Like I said, I'm over it. But I won't pretend it didn't happen (to me). And IF or when it happens again, I may handle it better, but I will not ignore it.
As for the OP; I went to a neighborhood catholic school- my mother as well as my aunts were very involved with the church that ran the catholic school. My mother sang in the choir, and she and my aunts volunteered for many programs and events run by the school and the church. I knew my way around the church, the rectory's receiving rooms, and I also became very familiar with the nun's convent on the same block as the church, rectory and school. Why? Because I was often sent to the convent as punishment for something I'd done in class, or for giggling in church, or whatever.
Nuns in the catholic church- here we have women who do it ALL. They cook and clean and do laundry for the priests in the rectory. They act as secretaries to the priests. They clean the church. They teach school. (this was back when 95% of the teachers in any catholic school were nuns; the other 5% were priests. Almost no lay people.) They run fairs and festivals, they do community services for people like charity work, and feeding the poor. Seriously, they did it all. The nuns were and still are to this day (at least what's left of them) the sturdy backbone of their church and community.
Sure, they are respected. Sure, they are appreciated (or at least we hope so). Sure, they are treated a little more "special" than regular women who may also be a member or work in some capacity within the church.... But they can never serve mass, be ordained, be bishops or cardinals, have a say or vote in their/the Church's policies or programs.
The bottom line is- Nuns always, a.l.w.a.y.s. follow directions and instructions from priests. Period. So, being respected, appreciated and/or treated a little more 'special' doesn't add up to being treated equally. Never did, and never will.
Some of you pointed your fingers at the Catholic church (and other sects / religions) as a way of excusing or explaining the inequality between male and female within Buddhism. Saying "Well, they do it too!" doesn't cut it.
Different religious tradition-- Judaism-- but the same misogynistic tendency.... In this passage from the book Kaddish, Leon Wiseltier begins by quoting a 17th-century rabbi Yair ben Hayyim Bacharach:
"The woman must be very careful that she is not responsible for the failure of men." No. The man must be careful that he is not responsible for his own failure. The joke on this little exercise in misogyny is that it robs men of their moral agency. They are portrayed as pathetic creatures who must be protected from women. For women have power. And since they have power, they must be made powerless.
As a Caucasion, I can intellectually appreciate the problems that African Americans have in our society but it's not the same emotional gut reaction as experiencing all the many ways my skin color determines how people react to me every day and how it feels to know this country is ran by mostly white folk. The same is true since I'm a male. When I was in college, we had guys who signed up to escort women around campus at night because several women had been attacked and raped. That seems normal to me. There will always be sick men out there eager to prey on women.
But I never had to worry about my safety if I decided to make a midnight munchie run. Try to imagine a world where the men have to get women to escort them so the men won't get attacked. Suddenly it doesn't seem so normal, does it? That sort of day in-day out disparity has to eat at someone.
I know it's the way it's always been and still is around the world and differing only in degree. I hate that for a huge population women are treated like property. I know that religion, including Buddhism, reflects cultural norms and values and seeks to justify this problem.
What I don't know is what to do about it, beyond what anyone can do on a personal level.
What I don't know is what to do about it, beyond what anyone can do on a personal level.
I often feel the same way. Then I remember:
Be The Change You Want To See In The World
It all starts on a 'personal level'. Speak up, speak out, step up, and step between those doing harm and the ones being harmed... every chance you get. It's not easy to do, we all turn away at times, wishing to not see, not get involved; exhausted perhaps (?) from the past efforts and still endless situations we see before us.
I went to a neighborhood catholic school- my mother as well as my aunts were very involved with the church that ran the catholic school. My mother sang in the choir, and she and my aunts volunteered for many programs and events run by the school and the church. I knew my way around the church, the rectory's receiving rooms, and I also became very familiar with the nun's convent on the same block as the church, rectory and school. Why? Because I was often sent to the convent as punishment for something I'd done in class, or for giggling in church, or whatever.
Nuns in the catholic church- here we have women who do it ALL. They cook and clean and do laundry for the priests in the rectory. They act as secretaries to the priests. They clean the church. They teach school. (this was back when 95% of the teachers in any catholic school were nuns; the other 5% were priests. Almost no lay people.) They run fairs and festivals, they do community services for people like charity work, and feeding the poor. Seriously, they did it all. The nuns were and still are to this day (at least what's left of them) the sturdy backbone of their church and community.
Sure, they are respected. Sure, they are appreciated (or at least we hope so). Sure, they are treated a little more "special" than regular women who may also be a member or work in some capacity within the church.... But they can never serve Mass, be ordained, be bishops or cardinals, have a say or vote in their/the Church's policies or programs.
Tell it like it is. On the parish level it's all about the "Priest" and his "Authority."
The bottom line is- Nuns always, a.l.w.a.y.s. follow directions and instructions from priests. Period. So, being respected, appreciated and/or treated a little more 'special' doesn't add up to being treated equally. Never did, and never will.
Maybe you need to adjust to it? It might actually not be the women who is the problem, but you.
Hey, I am just speaking demographically. The Episcopal Church is losing its members in droves due to climatic changes in the way things operate. For those of us who love the church and don't want to turn away, of course we'll have to adjust. The problem, literally that which is "thrown forth to be dealt with" (pro + ballein [Greek] ) ((Pro = before, baleen = to throw)) is not me. That's tantamount to saying that I'm the phenomenon (That which appears) and, believe me, I may not be the most humble person ever, but I doubt that I'd ever think myself that important or outstanding. Surely you meant that the problem lies with me or in me. That would make more sense.
But I feel more like a reporter here than a gainsayer.
I went to a neighborhood catholic school- my mother as well as my aunts were very involved with the church that ran the catholic school. My mother sang in the choir, and she and my aunts volunteered for many programs and events run by the school and the church. I knew my way around the church, the rectory's receiving rooms, and I also became very familiar with the nun's convent on the same block as the church, rectory and school. Why? Because I was often sent to the convent as punishment for something I'd done in class, or for giggling in church, or whatever.
Nuns in the catholic church- here we have women who do it ALL. They cook and clean and do laundry for the priests in the rectory. They act as secretaries to the priests. They clean the church. They teach school. (this was back when 95% of the teachers in any catholic school were nuns; the other 5% were priests. Almost no lay people.) They run fairs and festivals, they do community services for people like charity work, and feeding the poor. Seriously, they did it all. The nuns were and still are to this day (at least what's left of them) the sturdy backbone of their church and community.
Sure, they are respected. Sure, they are appreciated (or at least we hope so). Sure, they are treated a little more "special" than regular women who may also be a member or work in some capacity within the church.... But they can never serve Mass, be ordained, be bishops or cardinals, have a say or vote in their/the Church's policies or programs.
Tell it like it is. On the parish level it's all about the "Priest" and his "Authority."
The bottom line is- Nuns always, a.l.w.a.y.s. follow directions and instructions from priests. Period. So, being respected, appreciated and/or treated a little more 'special' doesn't add up to being treated equally. Never did, and never will.
Maybe you need to adjust to it? It might actually not be the women who is the problem, but you.
Hey, I am just speaking demographically. The Episcopal Church is losing its members in droves due to climatic changes in the way things operate. For those of us who love the church and don't want to turn away, of course we'll have to adjust. The problem, literally that which is "thrown forth to be dealt with" (pro + ballein [Greek] ) ((Pro = before, baleen = to throw)) is not me. That's tantamount to saying that I'm the phenomenon (That which appears) and, believe me, I may not be the most humble person ever, but I doubt that I'd ever think myself that important or outstanding. Surely you meant that the problem lies with me or in me. That would make more sense.
But I feel more like a reporter here than a gainsayer.
You must be fool to think that what I wrote was different than saying that the problem is in you. You are just trying to use complicated sentences and condescending language to try to throw away the focus from my argument. It seemed to be quite clear to everyone else that I meant that you had a problem or are a problem when you can't deal with women taking greater part in a religion. I am not thrown off by your expertise in greek language, nor am I impressed.
You misunderstand me entirely. I have said above many times that women excel in practical wisdom and therefore it would follow that their greater presence in Teaching the Dharma is sorely needed. We don't need more people with mere book learning and pedigrees if they aren't into the practical applications of the vinaya.
I stand against arbitrary obstacles excluding people from paths that they are called to, gender being one of them. Mere demographic information that I do neither subscribe to nor contribute to, that stuff is. I know I opened myself up to this line of criticism by removing the part I had struck out from from discussion in an earlier post, in response to other things. I just could not omit that part in my quote. In afterthought I realize that I opened a can of worms, but I assure you that problem is not in me or of me or by me. I'm simply the unwelcome messenger.
I come from another world. That's my excuse for often being so obtuse.
Yeah, my master's degree and the fact that many women excell in universites etc... Shows that we are just practical humans without academic skills. I am so tired of this view that we have hardwired gender roles. History shows that when women get new oppertunities they go for it. Stop creating more stereotypes, go out in the world with an open mind, and let go of your concepts. And dont make exuces for inequality. I understand your agenda, and you are not just the messenger. You are presenting your view, your subjective opinion which is purely conservative and sexist. You have/are a problem.
I don't think that men excelling at some things and women excelling at other things, is any more relevant to the path to the cessation of suffering than is age or skin color. These prejudices like all others just illustrate the limitations that all of us bring to a meditation practice and should be approached like any other arising phenomena.
Either you empower that prejudice with your conditioned behavior or you don't. Excusing ignorance is just what differentiates a religion from a practice.
In a panel led by Nevada GOP Chairman Tom Taber, conservative publisher Len Semas questioned the role of women in the workplace, according to Ralston Reports.
Semas said that he felt that women leaving the role of nurturer may have attributed to societal problems like attention deficit disorder.
"The reality is there is a special role that women take on, biologically, as the bearers of children and the nurturers of children," Semas said Thursday morning, as quoted by Ralston. "I don't know that we haven't created problems in society by ignoring that important role. ADD and various learning disabilities, hyperactive kids, kids building bombs in their garage."
Semas argued that women have left the home in the past few decades at about the same time that some of these issues started cropping up.
Here is what has to drive women to distraction. The GOP is responsible for political policies and laws that depressed wages and drove up the cost of living in the past few decades to where both parents have to work, in order to pay the bills. Now they complain it's the woman's fault that children are having problems because mothers should stay in the home raising the kids like nature intended. No thought about women maybe wanting more out of life than changing diapers and cooking meals for the family. Yep, society sure has a ways to go. And we're not nearly as male orientated a society as Japan and other Eastern cultures where Buddhism is practiced.
As for the rest, I I think you're exaggerating just a bit. We talk about these kinds of issues fairly often.
We talk more about killing a mosquito than we do about female roles in Buddhism.
Speak for yourself. I sincerely doubt there's anyone on this forum who talks more about progressive socio-economic and socio-political issues than myself. I will say that these types of discussions tend to devolve fairly quickly, however, which I find disheartening.
On the one hand, fighting against patriarchy and bourgeois social relations that seek to constrain and subjugate femininity is just commonsense to me, and I understand why people get heated when others seem to support the status quo.
On the other, I understand how distorted/unequal gender norms is a broader symptom of a society that's practiced patriarchy for centuries, and that patriarchal ideology has become so ingrained into our collective psyche that many men (and even many women) are conditioned to view the world in ways that are sexist and objectify women, so I try to have patience with those who either overtly support sexist views or who simply fail to realize their existence, whether in themselves or society in general (not that I always succeed).
In my opinion, the prevalence of male privilege embedded in our patriarchal society, as well as the negative aspects of socially-constructed, male gender norms (what some call 'toxic masculinity'), is definitely something that I think needs to be combated (as with classism, racism, homophobia, and a host of other 'isms'). The real question is how.
I think a combination of radical action and incremental, progressive change is the key; and in the case of women in Buddhism, I applaud the radical action of ordaining women by the monks in Sri Lankan as well as the dedication of women who have practiced, studied, and taken on leadership roles.
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
I was going to write a long post, and then I thought: "whats the point". Most of you guys have made up your mind. Women should hide from men so they don't let their animalistic urges come out. Cleaning and taking care of children is retirement and relaxing. Feminists want to rule the world and have MORE rights than men. Poor little men. Ruled by women. Even though the richest people on this earth are men, even though women aren't allowed to recieve certain teachings and even walk into monastries. Its a tough one to give the other sex equal rights, because lets face it, women aren't human they are another species. I am so tired of how sexist this forum can be, its a disgrace.
@JoyfulGirl, Actually, as a Female Moderator, I see very little overt sexism on this particular forum. I see much opinion, which all are entitled to give, but I don't see anything which makes me want to beat the living crap out of the feminist drum, thank you.
And trust me, while I know there is a fine line between blatant mysoginism and somewhat 'ignorant' opinion, I'd be down on it like a ton of bricks in an instant.
If you want 'sexist', I could nominate one specific forum which would have you screaming out in anger by your third post....One I no longer subscribe to, and refuse to post in, read or even recommend, any further. Until; you've tried them all, don't disparage. Indiscriminately.
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
Yeah, my master's degree and the fact that many women excell in universites etc... Shows that we are just practical humans without academic skills. I am so tired of this view that we have hardwired gender roles. History shows that when women get new oppertunities they go for it. Stop creating more stereotypes, go out in the world with an open mind, and let go of your concepts. And dont make exuces for inequality. I understand your agenda, and you are not just the messenger. You are presenting your view, your subjective opinion which is purely conservative and sexist. You have/are a problem.
@JoyfulGirl, By the sound of it, so do you. Your points are valid, but keep your temper in check, and abstain from personal remarks. They are neither warranted, nor welcome.
if you cannot construct a valid discussion without disparaging members who offer different viewpoints, then that shows a flaw in your attitude, and you ARE the problem.
OK?
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
The way I was spoken to was childish and disrespectful, AND, it was gender related, not fact related. I admit, I reacted badly. I should have just let it go- but maybe it was because I was recovering -right at that very time- from major surgery, (a hysterectomy; you know, "lady problems") and not feeling well, I was a bit more sensitive than I usually would be. So without thinking, I lowered myself to their level and spat back words that got me in trouble here... and reprimanded. The other person? No warning, no problem; and not one person here, male or female stepped up and said "hey now, that wasn't very nice" to the person insulting one of the very few women who still participate on this forum.
I agree that I could have presented my views less aggressive. But I don't agree with the point that some forums are more sexist so the "little" sexism that goes on here is okay.
@Frederica I respect that you are the moderator, and your words are final. I am not going to continue this discussion as I feel I have said what I needed to say.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
I agree that I could have presented my views less aggressive. But I don't agree with the point that some forums are more sexist so the "little" sexism that goes on here is okay.
It depends what you - and/or I - construe as 'sexism'.
@frederica, I guess we differ in our opinions there
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
And that's ok.
(No first 'r' in federica. I merely say that, because putting the '@' sign in front of names alerts that named member to a response. But the name has to be spot-on. If not, the direct response risks being missed altogether, by the intended recipient. )
Comments
Unfortunately people are "kinda" vilifying people like myself who come from a different background and see things through different colored lenses. But we all see things through different colored lenses. For my part, I don't see where I've insulted anyone, but I realize that people often take offense where none is intended.
NOBODY sees things objectively, save in mathematics and to a large degree in a lot of sciences. Monks are no exception, either. To hear some women here hear "Temptress" where something closer to "complication" is meant IS a bit of surprise to me, frankly. I guess I must just be an evil person, or at least a person with poisoned mind??? NOPE!
As a person interested in politics, I see the most bizarre concatenations of ideas present in people (especially on the Right), that I am stupefied. But I realize, as in tastes, there's simply no accounting for what people think.
I do register my surprise at the emotional baggage, albeit light, being brought into this forum —a forum which should be about engaging with ideas and trying to understand them, rather than dismissing them as jaded ideas due to the way things strike one's ears. Maybe a little humility about one's hearing acumen might be in store?
I think it's a fair statement to make that most people at many times in their lives can only put their thinking down in rather awkward terms, anyhow. Jump on their awkward expressions and then... communication stops.
I've pretty much finished with what I said above in my first post: except that
I cannot predict the future or be responsible for actions not my own in present time. And though I think the practical wisdom that women are so very rich in would immensely benefit the Buddhist community if each genuine teacher, regardless of gender, would not be hindered by any system, I cannot say that I believe 50/50 parity is a justice issue, nor should ever be confused with human rights.
BUT people, even those in their 90s, do continue to develop throughout life. Bring me along further with kindness, not with spitting bitter tastes from your mouths.
The reason I haven't spoken out yet...although the very topic and original post ought to give you an idea of where I'm coming from...is that I wanted to let the ensuing posts tell the story. And they have.
I posted this topic after an online conversation with a friend.
Logically, about 50% of world Buddhists are women. I would guess that -- worldwide -- women in any form of leadership role in Buddhist temples and organizations make up less than 1-2% of Buddhist leadership. Would we accept that in any other non-religious field?
Our forum is overwhelmingly male oriented. Why? Do women not feel on an equal footing here?
I have probably visited 2,000 or more Buddhist temples in Thailand, not to mention Burma, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia. Number of women I have seen in those temples in any form of leadership role = 0. Number of mae chee (Buddhist nuns) I have seen in those temples = perhaps 25.
We can rant and rave on this forum about justice for gay people, people with mental health issues, Bradley Manning, and just about any other group of people who are unequal...but rarely is the issue about Buddhist women being in a subservient role mentioned. What is the old saying about cleaning one's own house first?
As for the rest, I I think you're exaggerating just a bit. We talk about these kinds of issues fairly often.
Yes to that paradigm, betaboy: the hegemony of cultural attitudes and norms and the mentalities imbued therein. Every institution, every workplace, and every tribe has a kind of mentality. And these cannot change overnight.
Vinlyn, I still don't understand the contempt people feel for the idea of male monasteries being closed to women. I believe that is quite another issue. After all, in the United States there are plenty of places for women only where men are not allowed, but it is only in sports where women are barred from men's teams. Women reporters are allowed into the locker rooms, though. And these places I've just alluded to are secular establishments, not cloisters. I just don't get this and I just no longer care how much people on NewBuddhist hate me for trying to understand things.
For the record....I am here everyday, usually interacting with
you guys/men....and I don't see it as a problem. When something
ruffles my feathers...afa....being sexist goes...I speak my mind, and
then we all move on, haha. Depends on if I feel like going there...haha.
Am I outnumbered? Yes.
For a bucket load of reasons.
Whatever. I'm over it.
No MAJOR girlie pic shows......talk is never raunchy.....jokes
don't seem to cross the line...
Everyone is pretty respectful of me here...
Buddhism is the main topic.....cultural/time/society material
cannot be helped... ....sad, I know.
Where are all these places where women bar men? You mean like a womens club? There are also mens clubs. But a small social group -- assuming that is what you are talking about -- is kind of irrelevant, as compared to an international religion.
I don't hate you in the least.
An interesting related article. And there are MANY you can Google.
Also try: http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/qanda-women.pdf
Gee whiz! That's so sweet!
I don't understand you in the least very often, though, I must say, Vinlyn.
I also must say that most of the people who know me find me very transparent and uncomplicated. "Simple" is one common description. "Adult Child" another. But mostly the Southern "You won't do!"
Can we get the NB research dept on that, please? .......Thanks :vimp:
I mean since you know some women being buddhists, then that must be empirical evidence that the leadership is 50/50.
The past depth and breadth are gone and even the mysticism of the hymns is being edited out in places.
Just saying what I see happening. But everyone has his or her perspective.
Metta
It might be another causality.
In the future people may well alter their gender as easily as gender x
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24767225
Kids may reorient before deciding which way to be. Some may eventually decide to be reassigned to a new species. Perhaps a dolphin.
The question is are dolphins capable of being Buddhas?
'What's that Flipper? Can you jump through the hoop for all the boys and girls?'
:crazy:
Separating the sexes seems to happen in most religions, and it's generally accepted as a good thing to avoid the distraction of sexuality. But no one has yet convinced me there is anything innately wrong with sex. Why is celibacy so prized among monastics? Surely it is wrong to view the world in terms of temptations that must be avoided at all costs?
Well, just for the record, a short time ago, I was involved in a somewhat 'heated' discussion, on this forum, mainly with just one or two others (males).
Now, believe me, I have moved on, and I'm not holding a grudge; as a matter of fact, I can't even remember the topic we were discussing- really, it wasn't that long ago, but I have no interest in looking it up...
Anyway, instead of angrily, heatedly, or passionately disagreeing with my *opinion* about something, (whatever it was), I was instead treated to several snide and insulting comments about it being "that time of the month" or that perhaps I was experiencing "women's issues" or words to that effect; and a couple of other stereotypical female put downs....
My opinion wasn't being countered with another explanation or opinion - my gender was being called into question as "irrational" or unstable. That was not only uncalled for, but simply not nice, at all.
The way I was spoken to was childish and disrespectful, AND, it was gender related, not fact related.
I admit, I reacted badly. I should have just let it go- but maybe it was because I was recovering -right at that very time- from major surgery, (a hysterectomy; you know, "lady problems") and not feeling well, I was a bit more sensitive than I usually would be.
So without thinking, I lowered myself to their level and spat back words that got me in trouble here... and reprimanded.
The other person? No warning, no problem; and not one person here, male or female stepped up and said "hey now, that wasn't very nice" to the person insulting one of the very few women who still participate on this forum.
::: shrugs::: Like I said, I'm over it. But I won't pretend it didn't happen (to me). And IF or when it happens again, I may handle it better, but I will not ignore it.
As for the OP;
I went to a neighborhood catholic school- my mother as well as my aunts were very involved with the church that ran the catholic school. My mother sang in the choir, and she and my aunts volunteered for many programs and events run by the school and the church.
I knew my way around the church, the rectory's receiving rooms, and I also became very familiar with the nun's convent on the same block as the church, rectory and school. Why? Because I was often sent to the convent as punishment for something I'd done in class, or for giggling in church, or whatever.
Nuns in the catholic church- here we have women who do it ALL. They cook and clean and do laundry for the priests in the rectory. They act as secretaries to the priests. They clean the church. They teach school. (this was back when 95% of the teachers in any catholic school were nuns; the other 5% were priests. Almost no lay people.) They run fairs and festivals, they do community services for people like charity work, and feeding the poor. Seriously, they did it all.
The nuns were and still are to this day (at least what's left of them) the sturdy backbone of their church and community.
Sure, they are respected. Sure, they are appreciated (or at least we hope so). Sure, they are treated a little more "special" than regular women who may also be a member or work in some capacity within the church.... But they can never serve mass, be ordained, be bishops or cardinals, have a say or vote in their/the Church's policies or programs.
The bottom line is- Nuns always, a.l.w.a.y.s. follow directions and instructions from priests. Period. So, being respected, appreciated and/or treated a little more 'special' doesn't add up to being treated equally. Never did, and never will.
Some of you pointed your fingers at the Catholic church (and other sects / religions) as a way of excusing or explaining the inequality between male and female within Buddhism.
Saying "Well, they do it too!" doesn't cut it.
But I never had to worry about my safety if I decided to make a midnight munchie run. Try to imagine a world where the men have to get women to escort them so the men won't get attacked. Suddenly it doesn't seem so normal, does it? That sort of day in-day out disparity has to eat at someone.
I know it's the way it's always been and still is around the world and differing only in degree. I hate that for a huge population women are treated like property. I know that religion, including Buddhism, reflects cultural norms and values and seeks to justify this problem.
What I don't know is what to do about it, beyond what anyone can do on a personal level.
I often feel the same way.
Be The Change You Want To See In The World
It all starts on a 'personal level'. Speak up, speak out, step up, and step between those doing harm and the ones being harmed... every chance you get.
It's not easy to do, we all turn away at times, wishing to not see, not get involved; exhausted perhaps (?) from the past efforts and still endless situations we see before us.
Surely you meant that the problem lies with me or in me. That would make more sense.
But I feel more like a reporter here than a gainsayer.
You must be fool to think that what I wrote was different than saying that the problem is in you. You are just trying to use complicated sentences and condescending language to try to throw away the focus from my argument. It seemed to be quite clear to everyone else that I meant that you had a problem or are a problem when you can't deal with women taking greater part in a religion. I am not thrown off by your expertise in greek language, nor am I impressed.
BTW...
I think we need a *BOOM!!* button.
What do you think, @Vastmind? I'll bet @JoyfulGirl would like it too!
I stand against arbitrary obstacles excluding people from paths that they are called to, gender being one of them. Mere demographic information that I do neither subscribe to nor contribute to, that stuff is. I know I opened myself up to this line of criticism by removing the part I had struck out from from discussion in an earlier post, in response to other things. I just could not omit that part in my quote. In afterthought I realize that I opened a can of worms, but I assure you that problem is not in me or of me or by me. I'm simply the unwelcome messenger.
I come from another world. That's my excuse for often being so obtuse.
These prejudices like all others just illustrate the limitations that all of us bring to a meditation practice and should be approached like any other arising phenomena.
Either you empower that prejudice with your conditioned behavior or you don't.
Excusing ignorance is just what differentiates a religion from a practice.
In a panel led by Nevada GOP Chairman Tom Taber, conservative publisher Len Semas questioned the role of women in the workplace, according to Ralston Reports.
Semas said that he felt that women leaving the role of nurturer may have attributed to societal problems like attention deficit disorder.
"The reality is there is a special role that women take on, biologically, as the bearers of children and the nurturers of children," Semas said Thursday morning, as quoted by Ralston. "I don't know that we haven't created problems in society by ignoring that important role. ADD and various learning disabilities, hyperactive kids, kids building bombs in their garage."
Semas argued that women have left the home in the past few decades at about the same time that some of these issues started cropping up.
Here is what has to drive women to distraction. The GOP is responsible for political policies and laws that depressed wages and drove up the cost of living in the past few decades to where both parents have to work, in order to pay the bills. Now they complain it's the woman's fault that children are having problems because mothers should stay in the home raising the kids like nature intended. No thought about women maybe wanting more out of life than changing diapers and cooking meals for the family. Yep, society sure has a ways to go. And we're not nearly as male orientated a society as Japan and other Eastern cultures where Buddhism is practiced.
On the one hand, fighting against patriarchy and bourgeois social relations that seek to constrain and subjugate femininity is just commonsense to me, and I understand why people get heated when others seem to support the status quo.
On the other, I understand how distorted/unequal gender norms is a broader symptom of a society that's practiced patriarchy for centuries, and that patriarchal ideology has become so ingrained into our collective psyche that many men (and even many women) are conditioned to view the world in ways that are sexist and objectify women, so I try to have patience with those who either overtly support sexist views or who simply fail to realize their existence, whether in themselves or society in general (not that I always succeed).
In my opinion, the prevalence of male privilege embedded in our patriarchal society, as well as the negative aspects of socially-constructed, male gender norms (what some call 'toxic masculinity'), is definitely something that I think needs to be combated (as with classism, racism, homophobia, and a host of other 'isms'). The real question is how.
I think a combination of radical action and incremental, progressive change is the key; and in the case of women in Buddhism, I applaud the radical action of ordaining women by the monks in Sri Lankan as well as the dedication of women who have practiced, studied, and taken on leadership roles.
And trust me, while I know there is a fine line between blatant mysoginism and somewhat 'ignorant' opinion, I'd be down on it like a ton of bricks in an instant.
If you want 'sexist', I could nominate one specific forum which would have you screaming out in anger by your third post....One I no longer subscribe to, and refuse to post in, read or even recommend, any further.
Until; you've tried them all, don't disparage.
Indiscriminately.
By the sound of it, so do you.
Your points are valid, but keep your temper in check, and abstain from personal remarks.
They are neither warranted, nor welcome.
if you cannot construct a valid discussion without disparaging members who offer different viewpoints, then that shows a flaw in your attitude, and you ARE the problem.
OK?
I don't intend to extend or discuss the matter in public, but let's just say you are mistaken.
I agree that I could have presented my views less aggressive. But I don't agree with the point that some forums are more sexist so the "little" sexism that goes on here is okay.
I'll take it private.
(No first 'r' in federica. I merely say that, because putting the '@' sign in front of names alerts that named member to a response. But the name has to be spot-on. If not, the direct response risks being missed altogether, by the intended recipient.