Episode 315: Faithless Feminist Karen Garst

2 comments on Episode 315: Faithless Feminist Karen Garst

  1. just another Canadian says:

    Guys, your comments on Obama’s lack of accomplishments left me a tad ….. Disappointed!
    You DO realize the level of straight-up obstruction his executive branch (1 branch of 3 I’m given to understand) has faced from Day 1. He was not elected King.

  2. Hutch says:

    I’m always confused about the confusion surrounding the fact that certain populations (women, blacks, etc.) tend to be dispropotionately theists. I believe that the correlation is clear–where there exists seemingly inescabable and severe trauma (i.e. oppression, slavery, discrimination, kidnapping, child abuse, domestic abuse), there is a triggered need for self-preservation which manifests in inverse consequences. In short, if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. When the consequences of refusing to get with the program are perceived threatening enough, challenging the program “manual” (i.e. Qu’ran, Bible) becomes a lower-level priority. There is a reason that paralell to aging, we find Santa Claus to be a silly concept. We consider the plausability of the idea that he can pull off logistical feats ridiculous and comical, even. We feel free to employ our critical thinking and challenge and, finally, are no longer subjected to his rules (i.e. be good all year, fall asleep before he climbs down your chimney) because the perceived consequences to doing so are minimal to none. Afterall, we grow older, gain autonomy and power and resources, and, so, heck, we can buy our OWN toys. The same isn’t true when it comes to religion or any other tool meant to control a segment of the population. Where girls-to-women are concerned, the consequences for questioning and disobeying authority, historically, are exponentially greater than for boys-to-men. We have been and are, typically, outnumbered and outgunned physically, first, and economically, to follow. Add our biology–early indocrination into the idea that our body is bad/shameful, being subjected to pregnancy (too often via sexual assault or coercion), a strong lean towards being self-sacraficing born of our maternal instincts, society’s preference and greater support for male-centered achievement, praise and independence (hence, need for Title IX). It’s no wonder that, as a result, we feel less at ease with the idea of being even more “difficult”. We then pass this adaptation-style survival tactic on. It isn’t until we feel safe on a fundamental level (see Maslow’s hierarchy of needs) that we feel safe in challenging “authority” or the status quo. I could go on and on with examples showing a direct correlation/causation (i.e. blacks disproportionately theists, blacks whose roots are from the south even more so), but I won’t. In closing, I propose that this “mystery” or “phenonmenon” would be less so if those who find themselves perplexed merely exercise their imagination: invision a scenario where you find yourself facing dire circumstances at the hand of someone with all the control and power and who aims to keep it that way for an unbearable length of your time, by any means necessary and at your expense. A ‘do what I say and believe what I say or else’ situation. You’d be surprised, I think, at how your mind, unable to reconcile the contrast that is what ought to be vs. what is reality, will cry uncle and finally recalibrate–convince you to sacrafice the self operating on a higher or cognitive level for the sake of preserving the immediate/fundamental self. The cognitive dissonance is triggered upon your realizing that believing and, even worse, professing and acting as if you are deserving of better only provokes grave consequences. Given this, for psychological survival, many resort to adapting accordingly, if that makes any sense. Okay. I’m done. (Oh, and I love listening to you guys!)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.