From rvh3@columbia.eduTue Oct 17 00:07:52 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 15:19:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Richard Vernon Hollinger
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: violence
On Thu, 12 Oct 1995 LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu wrote:
You have obviously personalized this matter. Because you
> have gone through an unpleasant situation, you generalize to other men. While
> I have very personal feelings about abuse towards women, I have not been the
> victim of abuse. I am not crying out because of a personal situation of my own,
> but rather because I see others in such desperate need.
> I am - and always will - stand up for abuse against women.
I have no problem with standing up against abuse of women--I am certainly
with you on that. But in your response to Burl you referred to the
statistics he cited as "obscene." I infer from this that you are not
saying the statistics are inaccurate, but that they should not be cited
because they can be used to justify violence against women. It is this
outlook I find disturbing, as it has resulted in evidence being ignored
and removed from the discourse, skewing popular ideas about men and
women.
Let me me offer an analogy to help explain my thinking on this matter.
I do not think it undervalues the suffering of Jews during World War II to
point out that there have been genocides in other places, such as
Cambodia and the Soviet Union. I do not feel it devalues their suffering
to point out that there have been genocides in which no outside powers
have intervened. Nor do I think it devalues that suffering to say that
the Holecaust should not be used to make generalizations about the
character of the German people. Finally, I do not think it would be
appropriate to ignore atrocities of Israeli soldiers on the basis that
this information could be used to justify violence against Jews.
There is a tendency among advocates of any particular group of people to
portray their own suffering as worse or more significant than others,
thereby ignoring or devaluing the suffering of others. But violence is
violence, suffering is suffering, no matter who are the perpetrators and
who are the victims.
The point I have been trying to make is that much
of the discourse on domestic violence has been skewed by advocates for
women, who have used evidence selectively and sometimes deceptively to
acheive political ends. For example, there was a survey about
sexual activities done on college campuses a few years ago that asked
the question: Have
you ever had sex when you did not want to? Most of the women answered
yes, and activists on a number of campuses used this as evidence that
there was an epidemic of rape that had to be addressed with new
regulations and programs to protect women. How was this deceptive?
Well, they never bothered to mention that a higher percentage of men
answered yes to that question than women, so if that was really evidence
of an epidemic of rape, men were the primary victims. Perhaps they would
have said that such evidence was obscene, like the stats that Burl mentioned.
But I would suggest that such distortions, which skew popular
views of a group (in this case men), are themselves obscene.
Richard
From JRuhl@tchmail01.tchden.orgTue Oct 17 00:13:32 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 95 17:42:00 PDT
From: "Ruhl, Jordis"
To: 'talisman'
Subject: Three Fascinating Men: Farakhan, O.J. and My Brother
Linda wrote:
As for Mr. Farakhan being one of the organizers of this march, I say let it
be.
I am not going to judge him by whether his views fit the feminist model or
not.
Have to tell you a story passed on to me several years ago by a guide at the
Wilmette House of Worship. This man said that Louis Farakhan's mother lived
near the House of Worship and enjoyed visiting it very much, so every time
Mr. Farakhan was in town he would bring her to the Mother Temple. This
guide had met Mr. Farakhan and his mother, and was impressed by him as he
had memorized all of Baha'u'llah's writings inscribed above each of the nine
entrances -- and he gladly recited each and every one. Hmm.
Regarding OJ and spousal abuse: here at Children's Hospital in Denver, we
see so many child-abuse cases and many of them are perpetrated by the
boyfriend of the mother. I don't have the percentages, but I can get them
and will post them. Also, in almost all cases in which a baby is shaken to
injury or death, the perp is the boyfriend or babysitter.
As to my final fascinating man, David Langness, let me say this. This is
the most dedicated Baha'i I've ever met. Bar none. He lives, breathes,
eats and drinks the Faith. You may write this off to sisterly love, but
it's more than that. I've seen him live his beliefs for nearly 30 years.
He patiently taught me the faith for 19 years before I declared. His whole
being is concentrated on teaching the faith. He does have a bit of a
tendency to rail against authority. And this leads me to ask: Why discuss
personalities? This is oh-so-pointless behavior. It doesn't matter if I'm
pedantic, and Joe is fruity and Sally is overbearing. What matters is what
we say. If you have a problem with what people say, it's appropriate to
address the content of the posting rather than their personality quirks.
Except Burl's quirks, of course...
While I'm up here on this cyber soap box addressing the dreaded TONE topic,
I've noticed something I'd like to share with you. When men on Talisman
respond to women, they seem to respond with a different tone than they have
with other men. Have you noticed this? Can someone explain this to me?
Just wondering...
Last idea. Some time back, at the front end of the decentralization topic,
there were several references to parents vs. children in relation to
administrative bodies vs. individual believers, or LSAs vs. NSAs. This
struck me as all wrong. IMHO (I've been dying to use that acronym), much of
the stagnation here in the US re: teaching work and maturation of LSA/NSA
has to do precisely with this mindset. It is only when we can more closely
mirror adult-to-adult interactions with our institutions and between
institutions will we prosper. Indulge me in an example:
In the 1980s, the Denver LSA was a mess. Big mess. National was called in
to make the determination whether or not to disband the LSA. The community
was in shambles. At Feast (my first Feast as a Baha'i, BTW), a believer
read aloud (over the protests of the LSA, much crying and wailing from the
crowd) a letter to the LSA citing all their failures and laying blame at
their feet. From what I now know, the letter wasn't too far off. The LSA
cried foul, and I've never seen that letter-reading woman since.
The persons responsible for making the recommendation to National told me
they were ready to recommend to disband. Then something happened. A new
family moved into the community. They had heard of the problems, but had
the maturity to look beyond the din. This new family got a large group of
believers together and put on an elegant dinner and presentation to honor
this embattled LSA. Yes, that's right -- honor them. The community started
to heal. The recommendation to the NSA was to maintain the LSA. Since
then, our community has seen tremendous fruits.
I can hear my dear brother groaning over this sweet, sweet story, and maybe
many others of you as well. But it's a strong message on the tremendous
power of unity. I don't ever recall 'Abdu'l-Baha using direct criticism to
change behavior or build maturity. I believe he intends us to love each
other into submission!
But this honoring moves in both directions. IMHO, whenever an institution
or an individual counts someone in the community as bad, or inappropriate,
or contrary, or rebellious, they are splitting good and evil, and projecting
the bad outside/beyond them -- big time. "I am all good and you are all
bad." David has much to offer this Baha'i world, and if National could
embrace their critics and listen earnestly to them (not just those who spout
party line) -- wow. I see very clearly how David has become an embodiment
of some fear of the NSAs. Tough for David. And tough for the NSA. And
tough for our national community.
My spontaneous, long and windy thoughts. Thanks for reading.
Jordis Ruhl
ruhl.jordis@tchden.org
p.s. One last word. Re: the language used at the end of the letter from
the NSA to David. C'mon. That was a slam if I've ever heard one. It's
obvious to me that someone struck a nerve. But then again, if I had to read
that word "spin doctor" one more time...
From TLCULHANE@aol.comTue Oct 17 00:13:59 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 19:50:56 -0400
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: violence
Come now gents . Do you really want to argue that incidence of
violence toward men perpetrated by women are commensurate with incidents of
violence towards women perpetrated by men .
I would like to see the "evidence " Burl cites for starters , not just
a reference to it but an actual citation , otherwise I must consider it
"hearsay " .
As for de-constructing how about if we re - deconstruct and suggest
that this argument sounds suspiciously like a conservative backlash argument
currently fashionable in America as blaming the victims . The privileges of
power do die hard .
We could treat this as an abstract subject and lose sight of the fact
we are speaking of real human beings. If anyone would like I will produce
names of real people and all the gory details , these are people i know . How
about a real life story of rape . I would bet e could find a man or two who
had been subjected such horror and then how many women do you suppose . . . ?
The resort to gee us guys are victims also obscures the appalling
incidence of violence towards women . I am amazed that we would resort to a
form of argument that trivializes this issue . The college study cited as a
defense falls apart on its merits . If it was designed in an obfuscating
manner the responses of males cannot be considered as reliable as to draw a
conclusion that men are victims of rape . One does not have to approve the
excesses of certain feminists to comdemn violent behavior . I am surprised
that an argument would be made that the excesses of some feminmists be used
as a tool to obscure the violence directed towards women . Somebody please
explain the relevence of Abdu'l Baha's praise of white abolitionists with the
equation of men as victims of violence needs to be condemned on a par with
violence to women . I would like a logical explanation of the link . The one
I find is Abdul Baha would today be praising those men who are staunch and
open advocates of ending violence towards women , I dont read it as a
justification of slavery and that we should conclude that the slaveowners
were some how victims of equal status with the slaves.
If we want to condemn violence in general I am all for it . I want to
end the most apalling violence in the world perpetrated upon men and that is
war - not women . Having had some personal experience with the war issue and
its long term harm to men ,I would prefer to see men spend more time saying"
hell no i wont go nor will my sons" and less time trying to make a case that
the problem is women beating up on men .
I ll rest with the Universal House on this . They did not have a letter
written by the Secretariate condemning violence by women towards men .
warm regards,
Terry
From carl@grapevine-sys.comTue Oct 17 00:14:16 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 20:24:06 -0500
From: Carl Hawse
To: Stephen Johnson
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: PLEASE READ AND REPLY!!
I would like to see a slow read of the Hidden Words continue. They are
already shredded into bite-size chunks, perfect for posting. They contain a
wide variety of symbolic, cultural, and personal meanings.
It is easy for slow reads to get off track, though. Here are some suggestions:
1) Preface the subject line of every posting about a slow read with the
title of what is being considered: "HW: Re[6] What it means to me", "KA:
Paragraph 4 Transliteration", etc. Many email programs can sort by subject
and can group all the slow-read postings together. Talisman is a busy
list--it helps to sort it all out.
2) Pick a coordinator and post a schedule: "October 14-20: Paragraphs
1-10, October 21-27: Paragraphs 11-20, October 28-Nov. ??: Catch Up and
Review", whatever. The coordinator will take periodic votes to see if it is
reasonable to continue if interest seems to be diminishing. No posting
topic should be farther ahead than the schedule, but topics from any week
should be free for comment.
3) Establish an archive for those who join late or miss messages.
Store the English version, the Transliteration, The Latest Revised Schedule,
(maybe scans of the persian or arabic?!?), and all the messages to date.
Using the guidelines in (1), it will be easy to cull out and save the
messges. Even if the slow reads DO die out, they'll be easier to start up.
And where IS the talisman WWW site? ;>
Talisman fills up my in-box quickly. If I miss checking messages for a
while, they build up so I delete the unread ones and start fresh. If there
is a controversy or other hot topic (women on the house, etc.) then I may
skip over the slow-read stuff for a while. That does NOT mean I'm not
interested. Just distracted.
------------------------------------
Carl Hawse
carl@skipper.grapevine-sys.com
http://www.grapevine-sys.com/~carl
------------------------------------
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpTue Oct 17 00:15:38 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 10:29:43 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, friberg@will.brl.ntt.jp
Subject: Battering
Dear All:
My neighbor back in the barrios of Socorro was Linda Chavez, mother
of two marvelous children whom she battered periodically and who
understood why and still loved their mother very much. Linda's family
was the ultimate disfunctional family, which didn't keep them from
being totally charming and marvelously friendly. Two of her brothers
were in the state penitentiary for murder, her dad and mom were long
divorced, she had been beat up by father and step father so many times
that she couldn't count them all, and had been in and out of so many
foster homes that she couldn't remember them all.
Two episodes stand out in my memory. In one, the children came over
early in the afternoon to ask for my help. Linda's brother was coming
to visit later in the evening and she was very worried that she would
be battered. I was to stand by with a baseball bat in case things got
bad. The reason things were expected to get bad was that Linda's
brother's wife had provoked him extremely by sleeping with his best
friend and then telling everybody. When macho is of such importance,
this was punishment indeed. But the brother, drunk and in rage,
couldn't find his wife. So, Linda felt that she would be the one on
the receiving end. Fortunately, my expertise with baseball bats was
not needed that night!
The second episode was when Linda's father came one fine Saturday
afternoon for a visit. He did it in style, loping in on a fine,
gentle, beautiful palomino which he tied up in front of my house
so that I could take the girls for a ride. And what a marvelous
ride that was, ambling through the arroyos and people's backyards
with this wonderful horse, two excited and deliriously happy
children, and one excited and deliriously happy me.
Afterwards, his daughter introduced me to her father, this old
Spanish cowboy, and my head spun with a drunken understanding
of the hardships, hopes and delights of 400 years of ranching on the
upper reaches of the fabulous Rio Grande, that fantastic river
of enchantment which knows no peer. And the afternoon sun poured
down in its golden, autumn glory!
Yes, I finally understood many things. Why, at the Highway 85 Nite
Club, there were knifings every Saturday night. Wild and free in
the hills, walking the fence all week long, Saturday was the time to
come into town. The purpose was to fight. Of course there had to
be knifings.
Linda's mother cooked for us that summer at Langmuir Laboratories,
on top of the nearby 4km high Magdalena mountains. We caught
lightning during the day, chased turkeys in the afternoon, ate
pinto beans, tortillas, enchiladas, tamales, menudo, and chicken
in the evening, waited for house calls from the racoon family
at night, and then exalted at the glory of the Milky Way before
falling asleep. And Linda's mother, wise and caring, clucked
over us and chided us, and made me stop chasing women.
How could I be the judge of these people?
Yours sincerely,
Stephen Friberg
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduTue Oct 17 00:17:04 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 95 20:39:09 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: abusive relationships
Yes, Paul, we have all known of cases such as the ones you describe. These
cases are often used to justify abuse against women. All women really want to
be beaten.
In reality, women in every society are taught what is considered attractive in
a mate. Most societies glorify the warrior/athlete type. The most popular
guys in school are usually the football players. This is only partially
"attraction." There is a lot of social pressure on girls to "get" these guys.
I remember how I went up in my girlfriend's esteem in high school when I dated
someone on the wrestling team. (In fairness to me, I didn't have a clue that
he was an athlete until they told me. With me, he stressed his interest in
music.) If people want to address studies, there are studies going on now
about athletes and violence. The link is still be debated, but it does seem as
if the very macho team sports promote violence, especially violence towards
women. Example - women's genitalia are sometimes painted on punching bags.
So, if women end up with guys who are abusive, it is not surprising. They
don't go out with these guys so that they can get abused. They go out with
them because they represent an image of the male that is admired in this and in
most societies. I will not deny that there are women with masochistic
tendencies. We are all different. But, of all of the cases of violence
towards women that I know, masochism wasn't an issue. None of the women I know
who have been abused knew that they were marrying an abusive man. They simply
thought they were marrying a "manly" man. The abuse came later.
Of course, the woman is just supposed to leave. But, I would hope the case of
Nicole Brown Simpson would, once and for all, illustrate the dangers of that
strategy. Also, if you were watching, you could see O.J.'s letters of apology
to her after he beat her. A woman who loves a guy wants to believe that he is
going to reform; that he'll never beat her again. Besides, he is probably the
father of her children. What is she to do?
I agree totally with Terry. I guess what bothers me is that, by bringing men
into the picture as equal victims of domestic violence with women, we are
diminishing the horrendous suffering of women. And by insisting on being
analytical is awfully difficult when you are watching the abused women. You
want statistics. Statistics don't mean a whole lot when you are confronting
bloodied, beaten women.
Nicole Brown Simpson (while far richer than any of the women I know) is very
much the typical case of the battered woman. She thought she was marrying a
gorgeous, charming "hunk" of a guy. He seems to have started to abuse her
after she got pregnant and began to lose her figure. He derided her for being
fat while she was pregnant. After that he started throwing her around and
pounding on her (not to mention sleeping with other women in their own home.)
She called the police but they did nothing until she absolutely insisted on
pressing charges. The judge gave him a slap in the wrist. The story is too
familiar. There is a chorus of abused women out there saying "that is my
story!"
If these problems are so commonplace and severe for men, I wonder why
I have not witness any of this. I am in as much contact with men as with
women. Men frequently confide in me about their relationships. None of them
has ever complained about being beaten by a woman. They have told me that they
have contracted venereal diseases from them. They have told me about their
wives' erratic or nasty behavior - usually in great detail. But beaten - no.
And I certainly have never seen them with black eyes, broken bones, etc., the
way I've seen women.
Part of my emotional reaction to all this has to do with what is going on in
other parts of the world as well. The majority of refugees are women and
children. The U.N. (I think it's the U.N., anyway) has produced some
incredible films about the situation in camps in various parts of the world. I
viewed one of them, but it was all I could do to stay in the room. I just sat
and cried. As Terry said, these women have nothing to do with starting wars,
but women and children in modern warfare are becoming its worst victims.
I would hope that once in awhile we could leave our cold world of statistics
and look at reality. The majority of women in this world are really quite
helpless against male brutality. When families fall apart, when society
becomes disordered, the women suffer immeasurably because they are left totally
unprotected. Please don't belittle the situation. Terry ended his letter
well by reminding us that the UHJ's letter specifically addressed brutality
towards women. Obviously, they see it as a problem as well. Linda
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzTue Oct 17 00:17:46 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 15:05:14 +1300
From: Robert Johnston
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: violence
Dear Terry,
My intent in writing my letter was to suggest that certain forms
of discourse, while masquerading as "part of the solution" were in fact
part of the problem. I argued for a more moderate form of argumentation.
Below I respond to your response to letters on this matter, including mine.
> Come now gents . Do you really want to argue that incidence of
>violence toward men perpetrated by women are commensurate with incidents of
>violence towards women perpetrated by men .
I think that many men might feel that a "men bad" - "women victim"
dichotomy is unhelpful in terms of presenting solutions. Only the innocent
really have the right to make this case, and the Writings tell us that "all
are sinners".
> As for de-constructing how about if we re - deconstruct and suggest
>that this argument sounds suspiciously like a conservative backlash argument
>currently fashionable in America as blaming the victims . The privileges of
>power do die hard .
Each argument must be examined without prejudice, and without recourse to
labels. Must we not avoid polarisation?
> We could treat this as an abstract subject and lose sight of the fact
>we are speaking of real human beings. If anyone would like I will produce
>names of real people and all the gory details , these are people i know . How
>about a real life story of rape . I would bet e could find a man or two who
>had been subjected such horror and then how many women do you suppose . . . ?
It is rather presumptuous to assume that these stories are not generally known.
> The resort to gee us guys are victims also obscures the appalling
>incidence of violence towards women . I am amazed that we would resort to a
>form of argument that trivializes this issue .
Why should we turn a blind eye to all injustice, except that of men? Which
letter on this matter "trivialised"?
The college study cited as a
>defense falls apart on its merits . If it was designed in an obfuscating
>manner the responses of males cannot be considered as reliable as to draw a
>conclusion that men are victims of rape . One does not have to approve the
>excesses of certain feminists to comdemn violent behavior.
This assumes you know where the line may be drawn between "the excesses of
certain feminists" and the blameless actions of other feminists.
I am surprised
>that an argument would be made that the excesses of some feminmists be used
>as a tool to obscure the violence directed towards women .
Again, who is obscuring what? This could be read as a piece of offensive
presumption. The main counter-thrust has been to broaden rather than limit
perception.
Somebody please
>explain the relevence of Abdu'l Baha's praise of white abolitionists with the
>equation of men as victims of violence needs to be condemned on a par with
>violence to women . I would like a logical explanation of the link . The one
>I find is Abdul Baha would today be praising those men who are staunch and
>open advocates of ending violence towards women , I dont read it as a
>justification of slavery and that we should conclude that the slaveowners
>were some how victims of equal status with the slaves.
When we have writers openly and persistently attacking the real and assumed
behaviours of O.J. Simpson, we have a manifest breech of Baha'i standards
concerning relationships with and attitudes towards those who are assumed
to be morally inferior. Again, where we have other [male] writers
appropriating to themselves positions of moral excellence in relation to
women we have the production of entirely illusory and useless posturing
that does not do anyone any good. These positions promote the "men bad" -
"women victim" dichotomy. These unjust and illusory arguments obscure the
fact that most Baha'i men are humbly and with great difficulty trying to
overcome their sexist heritage, and that these efforts are important.
Slavery occured in the American society as a whole, but critical to
emancipation were enlightened activities arising from within the oppressing
caste. And yes: slave owners were victims, just as any person/group is
that clings to ignorance. The critical question is this: how should be best
enlighten the ignorant? Moralistic preaching won't do it.
> If we want to condemn violence in general I am all for it . I want to
>end the most apalling violence in the world perpetrated upon men and that is
>war - not women . Having had some personal experience with the war issue and
>its long term harm to men ,I would prefer to see men spend more time saying"
>hell no i wont go nor will my sons" and less time trying to make a case that
>the problem is women beating up on men .
I do not think that the "case that the problem is women beating up on men"
has been made on Talisman, and to to state that it has amounts to
mischievous hyperbole. A few writers have, in moderate terms, expressed
the view that women ALSO beat upon men. Which is true. I think if
Talismanians were asked whether the matter of violence towards women was a
major issue in society, 99% would say it was. So why preach to them?
> I ll rest with the Universal House on this . They did not have a letter
>written by the Secretariate condemning violence by women towards men .
Perhaps that is where you should have begun, and left it at that.
Robert.
From TLCULHANE@aol.comTue Oct 17 00:18:22 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:53:37 -0400
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: more questions Wadat al Wujud
Dear Nima and Ahang ,
I have it on good authority ( a houri ) that She probably did direct
Her amanuensis to discard this commentary somewhere in the vicinity of the
Abode of Peace . Portions of it remain , however as part of the "Hidden
Treasure ". And we know whose love is the "key" to finding that Hidden
Treasure . :) Since the "earth " of our hearts has its counterpart in the
next world I strongly encourage you to go cruising the alam -i mithal in
search of it . No doubt you will attain your hearts desire . I will meet you
at the "bridge " or would it be the isthmus ? or maybe the Kwathar ? There
is a river there right ? Now Ahang we need you to come along my sense of
the topography is easily confused . I was wondering if it might be a
shortcut if we went via . . The Road to Shiraz ?
Now back to the imaginal world and my questions .
Thanks for your earlier answers especially to the "Tajalli " question .
Since I have you could we discuss and you guys explain the difference ( or
would it be similitudes) between "Tajalli " as self-disclosure , fayd as
emanation , and mazhar as manifestation . Perhaps we could entice Prof.
Walbridge to join our expedition. In regard to the latter two i have tried
to read Abdu'l Baha on this in SAQ and well it makes my head hurt or explode
. So as Arash said last spring "use English dudes" . :)
I am trying to put "rational concepts" to my "beliefs". We all know
the Tajalli , the form in which my Lord appears to me or the God of my
faith . I am trying to better understand what the heck is happening so I can
make some sense of it to myself and anyone else who sets out for the Abode of
Peace via the ...Road to Shiraz.
One more thought . I am intrigued by the relationship between Tajalli
and K1 of the Most Holy Book . Would it be safe to consider that this
inseperable twin "Irfan" and its inseperable "other" half Observance are
somehow related to "Tajalli ", like first cousins maybe ? Not be an Arabist
i dont know the geneology . There seems to be something here , am I nuts ?
warmest regards ,
Terry
From dann.may@s-box.misc.uoknor.eduTue Oct 17 00:18:46 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 95 21:20:23 -0500 (CDT)
From: dann.may@s-box.misc.uoknor.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Teaching christians
My Dearest Ahang,
January or February would be fine. I am sorry to hear about the disunit
over the success of the teaching project.
As to posting information on teaching Christians, I will be happy to do
However, I must state several caveats. First, most of what you saw at t
Baha'i School and much of what I will post is discussed in great detail
Michael Sours books entitled "Understanding Christian Beliefs" and
"Understanding Biblical Evidence." Secondly, my approach is decidedly
apologetic and rhetorical (in the best sense of this term) -- those loo
for an historical analysis or a scholarly discussion of Hebrew and Gree
terms from the Hebrew Bible and Christian Gospels will be disappointed.
do not apologize for this approach. When teaching others of the healing
message of Baha'u'llah, the intent is to attract their hearts and allay
their fears, not to engage in philosophical hair splitting or historica
analysis -- I save that for my colleagues at the university! I can only
hope that such considerations will spare me from the inevitable critici
that will no doubt arise over the approach I take.
Warmest greetings, Dann May, Philosophy, OK City Univ.
* WR 1.31 # 669 * The truth is just an excuse for lack of imagination.
Warmest greetings, Dann May, Philosophy, OK City Univ.
---
* WR 1.31 # 669 * ASCII to ASCII, DOS to DOS.
From richs@microsoft.comTue Oct 17 00:20:10 1995
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:38:15 -0700
From: Rick Schaut
To: "'LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu'" ,
"talisman@indiana.edu"
Subject: I Want to Fix It! (RE: marginalized)
Dear Linda and Friends,
>To continue on the "David" theme for a moment longer, obviously there are
>extreme differences in the way we perceive David's letter and the NSA's
>response to it. No doubt at all that our own histories with the
administrative
>order color our readings.
I think it's more than just individual's histories with
various institutions. As has been noted before, some of
us who might be viewed as siding with the National Spiritual
Assembly in this particular case have been kicked around ourselves.
Each of us brings some baggage to our perceptions of the
Administrative Order. This baggage colors our perceptions as much
as the knocks and bumps we acquire as we attempt to interact with
it.
If we attempt to understand the Administrative Order by overlaying
traditional notions of power on top of it, we've missed the point.
This doesn't mean that power doesn't exist within the Administrative
Order. But the whole notion and purpose of consultation is to minimize
the extent to which any given individual has inherently more power
(power, in this sense, being the ability to affect or change policy)
than anyone else. Moreover, the very structure of the Administrative
Order, with all _authority_ being vested in the hands of elected
institutions, serves to further minimize the extent to which any
individual can exercise power.
We have to realize that power is not, in and of itself, a bad thing;
this notwithstanding the old saw about power corrupting and absolute
power, etc. The goal of any social order is to bring the exercise
of power in line with whatever principles are deemed to animate that
social order. It would be worthwhile to contemplate upon the salient
features of the Administrative Order in light of this idea. This
forum doesn't allow an adequate treatment of this subject, but I
believe these features promise the single most effective form of
social order in terms of maximizing the extent to which any exercise
of power conforms to principle.
The extent to which the Administrative Order lives up to this
promise is directly proportional to the extent to which each one
of use strives to adhere to the principles of the Faith. If we,
as individuals, do not strive to reach that level of maturity
expected of us, then what right do we have to demand that those
who serve on institutions demonstrate a higher level of maturity?
We have no such right. Indeed, to demand that the institutions
behave better is to fail to be on our own best behavior.
This is why I've repeatedly called for us to turn within ourselves,
to spend time thinking about our own attitudes and desires, and
make every effort to attempt to understand how our attitudes and
desires affect our perceptions. When we read the National Spiritual
Assembly's response to David's letter, did we carry any expectations
with us into that reading? If so, how did those expectations
affect how we felt about their response?
These are the questions we need to ask, and we need to ask them
over and over again. Detachment takes on many different flavors.
Old ideas, ingrained attitudes, and what is referred to as the
Kingdom of Names, these are as much vehicles of attachment as
any physical comfort or material reward. The mental tests to
which we can expect to be subjected over the course of the
development of the institutions of the Faith involve no less an
effort at detachment than that exhibited by our brothers and
sisters in the spiritual cradle of our Faith when they've had to
choose between death and recanting their Faith.
I've seen, on Talisman, a very healthy spirit--a desire to fix
whatever ills seem to plague our society or the functioning of
the institutions of the Faith. This desire, however, must be
tempered with an equally strong desire to make our ideas and
our thoughts conform to the principles which have been laid
down in the writings, and to minimize the extent to which we
try to mold the Administrative Order to fit our views.
Juan's call for the establishment of Baha'i Courts epitomizes,
for me, what is, simultaneously, the best and the worst about
Talisman: great minds fueled by high-minded desires, but which
are not adequately tempered by a desire to understand the
deeper meanings of the principles of the Faith and the Covenant
through which those principles operate. The end result is
a diffusion of energy into half-baked ideas about changes in
authoritative structure.
Yet, herein lies my quandry. I am neither as eloquent nor as
intelligent as the rest of Talisman. I have a great deal of
difficulty expressing things that I understand on a spiritual
level. This can, at times, lead to a strident tone, because
I cannot adequately explain that which each of you are capable
of understanding if you put the same effort into studying the
teachings and self-examination that you put into expressing your
desires to fix things.
We can, in a way, continue this theme into the discussion of
California v. Simpson and the social impact of the jury's
verdict. Again, I see the strong, and very healthy, desire to
fix things. I understand that it is very difficult to see
suffering and not jump into the fray. At the same time, I
think we're looking at symptoms and not the cause. There is
a cancer beneath all this pain and suffering, and the cancer
is a failure to appreciate, to the fullest extent possible,
the principle of the oneness of humanity. If people regard
their spouses as an integral part of themselves, if they
regard that spouse's welfare as equal to their own, then how
can they abuse each other?
If we really want to fix it, there are two things we must do,
and we must do them without delay: live this Cause and teach
it to others. And we can do neither if we fail to strive,
in each passing day, to obtain a deeper understanding of its
mysteries and principles. This we cannot do if we are
content to just kick at the dirt around the base of the tree.
We might discover a large root here or there, but we won't ever
understand the fullness of the system if we don't get those
shovels out and clear away the dross and dirt of our
preconceived notions.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzTue Oct 17 00:21:35 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 22:19:15 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: utterly gentle yet all-swaying
Ffolks,
Sometimes the mind moves swiftly and deeply, and it when it does, it is
very hard to capture its findings. I have a few questions to ask, but
before I ask them, I will share a few of the thoughts which gave rise to
the questions.
Within the Writings, human beings are accounted to be distinguished from
animals through the existence of a rational soul, the foremost virtue of
which is the capacity to understand, though reflection. Reflection
(according to the Swiss psychologist jean Piaget, and the Russian
semiotician and psychologist Lev Vygotsky, et al) entails the formation of
mental concepts which enable us to make sense of *particular* things and
events. Thus, this object upon which I am sitting, is a particular chair
in the category of chairs which includes a huge variety of particular
chairs, and sub-categories of chairs. Now, it is Aristotle who gave us the
first comprehensive account of the categories of things (and his viewpoint
is similar to 'Abdu'l-Baha's). Aristotle's arrangement assumes that that
which is more universal is superior to that which is local, and that that
which more greatly reflects God's glory is superior to that which is less
illumined. Thus we have a great hierarchy of being which extends from
minerals, though vegetables, to animals and humans, and then beyond.
Humans, as has been stated, are blessed with a rational mind. The mind not
only has a capacity for intellectual and ethical (that is: rational)
reflection, but it also incorporates the realities of all equivalent and
lower things. Thus, mind understands through a process which is at once
objective and subjective; is at one with the ontology of the universe; and
operates in the same general-particular hierarchic fashion as that universe
which is at once both static and mobile, discrete and interconnected.
Through God's mercy the mind inevitably moves towards the universal (this
is illustrated by growth). Now, remembering that the mind functions through
conceptualisation, it may be stated that the mind moves towards a single
unitary concept which consciously incorporates all things. (Hence the
Greeks termed the Supreme "the Logos").
Moving along with these kinds of thoughts, is it not possible to attain to
a vision of the meaning of contingency? (The writer J.B. Priestly saw all
things as a flickering fire. Another thinker might see them as dust.)
Anyhow, further, might not the vision of the impotence of contingent
realities, lead the mind to assume the existence of that which is Potent?
Is it possible to "see" God as a Mighty Sun, utterly gentle yet
all-swaying?
Robert.
From rvh3@columbia.eduTue Oct 17 00:21:59 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 09:35:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Richard Vernon Hollinger
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: abusive relationships
On Thu, 12 Oct 1995 LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu wrote:
> So, if women end up with guys who are abusive, it is not surprising. They
> don't go out with these guys so that they can get abused. They go out with
> them because they represent an image of the male that is admired in this and in
> most societies. [Stuff deleted] None of the women I know
> who have been abused knew that they were marrying an abusive man. They simply
> thought they were marrying a "manly" man.
Exactly. I think this suggests that there is something terribly wrong
with our socially constructed ideas about masculinity. The qualities
that make men "manly" and often make them successful in public life (eg.
agressiveness, ability to remain emotionally distant) do not necessarily
make them good family members. Changing this will require a different
kind of socialization for men and women alike.
Richard
From TLCULHANE@aol.comTue Oct 17 00:23:48 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:39:24 -0400
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: rvh3@columbia.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re :Re: abusive relationships
Dear Richard ,
I could not agree with you more ! I too believe we have some deeply
flawed notions of masculinity and that these notions do a great deal of harm
to men . They are , I believe , a form of spiritual violence . I think we
see it on Talisman as well with the tendency of the males at times to out
macho one another intellectually.
My own struggles with this are a carryover from the Viet Nam war days .
Its been 25 years and I still work at repairing the psychic wounds. I
entered the army as a CO non combatant and felt very keenly the pull of the
"uniform " and all it implied for masculinity. I think people sometimes
underestimate the damage the brutality and gore of it all has on men. The
physical experience ends, the psychic sights and sounds remain . It is still
difficult for me to discuss this .
My salvation has been quite literally Baha u llah and the Example of
Abdu l Baha as to what it can possibly mean to be a man in this dispensation
. The picture of masculinity and far too often humanity , of seperatness ,
autonomy , self sufficiency is terribly lacking in wholeness . I have reached
a point in my life where the pursuit of excelence has little to do with
competition and self -promotion . I work in a busines that is heavilly
oprganized around constant self -promotion competition to "prove " ones worth
and existence . If you dont "produce " in increasing amounts you do not
have value . Furthermore you do not exist in a recognizable way. This may
well be the male equivalent of the "erasure" that feminists speak of about
women .
The presence of men , at least in this country , is tied to a materialist
ethos . If you want to have" being" its recognizable form is in the capacity
for ever increasing material production and consumption in the marketplace .
The market defines the normative boundaries of human "being ". Mr Mom
notwithstanding men do not have an existential option as normative to opt
out of all this . There are profounf internal and external pressures to
remain . Women can consciously or unconsciousle contribute to this stae of
affairs to the extent they are dominated by a materialist ethos . I would be
quite pleased if Bahai communities were able to offer men an alternative .
That being responsible and productive has to do with spirituality first , it
does not have to mean the size of the check you write .
In this regard I find K1 of the Most Holy Book valuable , you know , the
good old inseperable twins of recognition and observance . Exploring those
twins in terms of an emerging model of masculinity and by extension what it
means to be human might turn up some fascinating possibilities.
warmest regards ,
Terry
From pjohnson@leo.vsla.eduTue Oct 17 00:24:11 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 10:38:38 EDT
From: "K. Paul Johnson"
To: Ruhl Jordis
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Spiritual Disease
According to Ruhl, Jordis:
>
> But this honoring moves in both directions. IMHO, whenever an institution
> or an individual counts someone in the community as bad, or inappropriate,
> or contrary, or rebellious, they are splitting good and evil, and projecting
> the bad outside/beyond them -- big time. "I am all good and you are all
> bad." David has much to offer this Baha'i world, and if National could
> embrace their critics and listen earnestly to them (not just those who spout
> party line) -- wow. I see very clearly how David has become an embodiment
> of some fear of the NSAs. Tough for David. And tough for the NSA. And
> tough for our national community.
This stimulates me to articulate a perception/judgment that has
been forming in response to reading the Taherzadeh book after
reading Miller, and reading Talisman all along.
My conclusion is that it is ABSOLUTELY true that
"Covenant-breaking is a spiritual disease." However, I
disagree most strongly about the origin, nature, and proper
treatment of said disease. The disease is one that afflicts
organizations, groups, entire cultures: the desire to
completely reject, deny, obliterate dissent by declaring the
dissenter a non-person, a wicked soul who deserves torment in
this world and the next. The official explanation of the
expulsion of cbs is that they all tried to form new sects and
break up the unity of the Faith. The fact, about the recent
ones in the Holy Family, is that they refused to allow their
son/brother/cousin to dictate who they could marry. The whole
business of covenant-breaking being contagious is a means of
social control. CONTROL is what it's all about. Christianity
and Islam gave plenty of bad examples to follow, and Baha'i has
followed them to a degree that is appalling. If you can't be
readily controlled, then you must be objectified, dehumanized,
publicly disrespected. Words like "unconscionable" do exactly
that.
The Theosophical Society is not immune to this disease, and
perhaps no religion is. But no matter who the offender is--
the NSA, the TS President, the Pope-- treating dissenters as
"spiritually diseased" is itself a spiritual disease.
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduTue Oct 17 00:26:12 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 11:03:58 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: communication
Dear Rick, you have no trouble communicating your ideas at all. You always
come across as very reasonable and balanced. You are probably a wonderful
person to be around. I can't say the same for myself.
I find that I seem to look at the world very differently than you and many
others on Talisman. I feel that I am always being told to be docile and
accepting of the way things are and that they will somehow magically improve.
You have intimated on a few occasions that you have had your own problems with
the Baha'i administration. You have come to terms with matters in your own
way and are probably more at peace with yourself than some of us. However, I
live by my own conscience. When I see something wrong, I speak out. I no
longer care who criticizes me for this. I really don't care about the
consequences for myself at all.
A vast majority of us, I believe, became Baha'is because we wanted to see the
world a better place. A totalitarian approach to administration is not, to my
eyes, an improvement. Alas, this is what I am seeing repeatedly. You talk
about "elected representatives" but we have been over and over again the
process of elections. We have seen that the process does not work very well in
allowing new people into administrative positions. So, I cannot be placid
about the fact that the composition of the NSA really does reflect the voices
of the Baha'is.
On other matters, I find it interesting that discussion of abuse towards women
is such a divisive matter. Everyone on Talisman is quite willing to pay lip
service to the equality of men and women. But, boy, when you get down to the
real issues, then it's into the trenches. Those who have been on Talisman long
enough know that I have criticized "women's studies," that I am in my heart of
hearts do believe that mothers and fathers have different roles. I am not
joined by all my Talisman sisters on these issues. Yet, to me, it seems like a
very basic right of women to be free from the threat of physical abuse. What
good is it to have a high paying professional job if you are just going to go
home to be slapped around by your husband?
And, no , Robert. This is not an attempt to dichotomize. I was just involved
in a custody case where I testified for the father and took a strong position
against the mother because I saw her as unfit to care for her child. I am
capable of being fair minded on such issues. Yet, I refuse to water down the
issue of physical abuse against women by saying "men get beaten up by women
too." How about rape? Are you all going say, "men get raped by women too?"
Stephen told a colorful story of a family. It was very entertaining, but I
fear I don't quite understand the point. But, it has inspired me to tell a
brief story as well.
When I was in the hospital having my first born, I roomed with a beautiful
young woman with an exceptionally sweet disposition. She and I had given birth
to the largest babies in the hospital. We bonded quickly and she confided in
me about her life. Her husband was nowhere to be found. All through the
pregnancy he had beaten her. He had not failed to hit her in the stomach
either. When she had no money for food, she had to go find him one night. She
found him in a bar. He laughed at her, making fun of how ridiculous she looked
being pregnant.
Her mother came to visit. She said she had sent a box of cigar's to the young
woman's husband. I had to listen to the mother chide her daughter and
encourage her to forgive and forget. She wanted her daughter to go back with
this man. I haven't any idea what happened to this woman. But, since then, I
have witnessed other women reliving her story.
I guess I am very troubled by the fact that men seem so much in denial about
such matters. I have accused none of you of beating your wives. It never
occurred to me that any of you were doing so. However, I would like to think
that some of you were a little more conscious of what many women go through on
a daily basis. Maybe you can understand a little better why so many women
don't achieve a great deal in this world. If there is the threat of being
physically beaten, a woman is psychologically whipped. There isn't much for
her to do. Sorry for the ramblings and all the typos. Linda
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduTue Oct 17 00:26:50 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 09:38:20 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Locker Room Talk - ABS S.F. Mini-Report
Hi,
Just a really quick note before I get back on the road to go
back to the ABS conference at the S.F. airport.
Yesterday was great: meeting Juan Cole, Tony Lee, David Langness,
seeing Rob Stockman and Mark Foster (who am I forgetting?). As
Dan Orey said, none of them look like what you expect! No one
complained about Burl's table manners, but I missed the talisman
lunch yesterday at the hotel, so I can't tell you anything specific
about his table manners (I guess nobody slipped any peyote into
his salsa, otherwise there would have been a real spectacle.)
I'm going to try to take snapshots of the talisman dinner
participants, so if it works out, I may be able to offer copies.
I think that there was an official conference photographer,
maybe we can ask Sheila Banani about it later (she looked
incredibly in control considering what I guess are the
difficulties of organizing such a conference!).
There was a very entertaining presentation on the so-called
marriage tablet (it really *is* bogus), and a new unofficial
translation is available.
The Science/Tech section had a non-Baha'i speaker on evolution.
She heads a non-profit group that is one of the main clearing-
houses for anti-creationism information, very interesting!
Thats all, wish you all were at the conference for schmoosing!
EP
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduTue Oct 17 00:27:09 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 09:49:52 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: bashing as such (in denial...?)
Howdy,
re:
> Date sent: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:40:13 +1300
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
> Subject: bashing as such
...snip
> ... Remember: 'Abdu'l-Baha
> praised the white Americans who liberated slaves: He did not condone
> violence in ANY form.
>
> Robert.
>
Robert, you'll probably get lots of crapola for protesting the
strident howling and outraged posturing, etc., so perhaps the
following is pertinent:
(Oh well, someone had to mention it it): In Taherzadeh's
"Revelation" series, there are at least two instances where he
documents Abdu'l-Baha publicy striking someone in order to save
face.
EP
From dpeden@imul.comTue Oct 17 00:28:01 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 19:36:43+030
From: Don Peden
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: abusive relationships
I don't have a huge knowledge of the statistics for abuse in America,
Europe, or any other place in the world for that matter. I do know what I
have witnessed, and been subjected to myself here in Africa.
Ugandan women, for the most part, are trained to "be attractive". Even
their education is mostly seen as an asset to be re-imbursed come bride
price time. Her worth will be reflected in the bride price she commands.
Even though as a Christian nation, monogamy is cited, a man will often have
one "presentable" wife, legally married in the church, and other traditional
wives (and children) on the side. This is often with the knowledge of the
legal wife. What can she do? She has no financial alternative, as all land
and property belongs to the man. Even what she earns herself,
traditionally, is seen as being under the man, and traditional councils will
rule that way, despite legal laws changing. Who can find a lawyer, let
along afford one, especially when bribes are still a common problem in the
court system?
When legislature is passed to protect the rights of women, it still must be
implimented...whoops! Guess who sits in the councils.
There are a handful of women lawyers trying to make precedent setting cases
on behalf of women. They are not viewed kindly by many...troublemakers, you
know.
My time spent in Kabale was such an eye opener.
We are focusing on one aspect of abuse, but the topic is still abuse of
humankind. There are levels to this discussion. The men I knew in Kabale
were themselves victims of hopeless poverty and tradition gone with nothing
to replace it. For the most part, they had a sincere desire for a better
life, and often were willing to look at ideas which would bring about
change. It was hard for them to accept the poverty they and their families
were condemned to, but at the same time, some of these new ideas (such as
making a will leaving your property and land to your wife instead of your
brother) were so radical in their view, that it was too far for them to go.
It will come, but not at the rate we might desire. It will take generations.
Women use to have the protection of the clan. When a woman was married, she
became a wife of her husband's clan, and her children were children of his
clan. The clan would care and look after her at the death of her husband,
including providing her with her husband's brother as a new husband to
provide and care for her and her children. They were given certain rights
under the clan system.
That has changed with war, with AIDS, with the church, etc., and there are
not yet attitudes and enough laws to provide women with the protection they
need. They and their children are often left homeless (at the death of a
husband, the family of the husband can and often do come in and clean out
the house of all possessions, including the pots and pans, blankets, etc.),
as the land will pass to the brother. If he is kind, he may allow the
previous wife to continue to live on the land, and perhaps have access to
the land. On the other hand, he may not. The wife has no recourse.
While in Kabale, I met all kinds of women, many of them which I tried to
encourage to form groups. One group in particular I had a great deal of
contact with. A good half of them were widows with children, or
grandmothers who had their grandchildren to raise (parents having both died
of AIDS)and no means to raise them. One women, Irene showed me her broken
thumb; significant because it was her husband (who had taken a new wife as
Irene was unable to produce children) who broke it, forcing her to sign over
the rights to sell the land she was living on (he sat on the RC4 council for
the district, quite a high position). He couldn't sell the land without her
thumbprint, because he had legally married her before she had produced, and
was therefore "stuck" with her until he divorced her. The bible is still
cited here (as it is there, I suspect) as giving a man control of his wife,
and giving him permission to "discipline" her for the sake of her own
spiritual growth.
You read titles on the back page of newspapers like, "Man cuts off wife's
hand: Didn't like dinner", or man beats wife to death. You also read
headlines on the front page like, "Woman cuts off man's Penis, Doctors
miraculously reattach appendage." Needless to say which gender the editors
of the newspapers are.
When you talk to men here, they want women to participate by "producing" in
the society. Women should produce work, children, provide food for the
family, provide school fees, etc. The name for woman in Ruhiga is
"Omokazi". The word for work in Swahili is "Kazi". Interesting connection,
don't you think?
The statistics globally for the amount of work women do (somewhere in the
region of 80%), and the amount of access they have to the income or benefits
of that work (something like 10%) tells a lot of the story. Until their is
a gender balance on all levels, these statistics will continue to reflect
the distance we have to travel before we can start to see the fruits of
equality in gender.
Women of social status (ie., married to men of position and wealth), spend
much of their time looking good for their men. Beauty parlours abound, and
a fortune is spent on imported clothing, perfume, and high heels. These
womens' problems are quite different from the rural women. The rural women
refer to them as "Miria". When these women venture into the village, they
can be guilty of "talking down" to the rural women. This goes for
university trained extension workers, big time! The rural women hate it,
but if they complain, they may lose their opportunity. It is such a
terrible circle.
The shining ray of hope here are those men and women (few as they are) who
have genuinely seen the situation, and are busy making changes in their own
lives, and in their professions, which reflect a much more positive,
enlightened approach. They sometimes wear a label such as feminist, or
Christian, or Baha'i, but more often they just do it. (I have a problem
with labels, did I mention that?)
Like Steven, I have a hard time sitting in judgement on my friends and
neighbours. I have seen what they have seen. I could never possibly know
what they know. My life experience is not theirs. But I have shared in
their sorrows, rejoiced in their triumphs, been there when they give birth,
and helped prepare the body for burial. I have caught a glimpse.
What DOES impress me is the undauntable human spirit which refuses to
subject itself totally to oppression of any kind. They may make a gesture
of submission, but the minute the men are out of the room, or there is some
reason to meet, to laugh, to sing, to mourn, they are there giving vent to
the full pouring out of their hearts. Despite the hardship, the women are
the first to welcome life into the world, despite the miserable
circumstances they know awaits the child, and the last to give service by
preparing the body for burial. They are the ones to nurse, to keep watch,
to see the last sigh of breath leave the body. In North America that is all
sanitized by hospital procedure. (Here, you can often be born, die, and be
buried from the same room. It is part of life.) There is always hope that
tomorrow, something will happen; an opportunity will come up your path; God
will smile on you; and life will improve. You will have a chance to do
something for yourself or your family which will help you. (Collective
solving of problems is still very new here, and is still based on the
individual seeing real benefits to her/him from the collective experience.)
In the meantime, take tea with a neighbour, laugh, go to church and sing and
drum your heart out, rejoice that today, you are alive. This spirit is what
gives me hope for the future.
From Member1700@aol.comTue Oct 17 00:28:54 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:27:45 -0400
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: From the Conference in SFO
To all Talismaniacs:
The conference is now well underway. It is really amazing how many
Talismanians are here. We hang out together a lot, and it shows how the
virtual community can turn into a real community as soon as you can put faces
with names. Nobody looks like a computer screen, so it is fun to see how
different we all are from what you had imagined.
Rob Stockman is here, and Juan Cole, Jack McLean and Arash Abizadeh and
Amin Banani (three Talisman alumni), and Mark Foster, and Dan Orey, David
Langness, Carmen Mathenge, Derek Cockshut, and others. Who am I forgetting?
I was at our lunch on Thursday, and I am happy to report that everyone's
table manners were exemplary. Everyone is keeping an eye on Burl, though.
Oh, I forgot Chris Buck--my roommate--who is out hawking his book at this
very moment.
Anyway, tonight is the big dinner. I think we are going for Persian
food. I will keep you posted. If anybody burps, you will hear it here first
from me.
Tony
From lua@sover.netTue Oct 17 00:29:38 1995
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 19:55:32 -0400
From: LuAnne Hightower
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Abuse
Allah-u-Abha, friends! I'm several days behind on the discussions, so bear
with me, please. As a practitioner of body/mind therapies, I must attest to
the magnitude of the problem of abuse. I daily work with women who were
violated by fathers, brothers, uncles, some of them when they were barely
walking. I am also aware of the effects of physical abuse on children -
male and female alike perpetrated by both men and women. And I
occasionally (most of my clients are women) encounter the effects on men of
neglect by mothers who were being or had been abused and of abuse by the
fathers that were beating their mothers. And I think that all too often we
overlook the far reaching effects of verbal abuse by parents who carry
generations of rage and loss of dignity.
The legacy of abuse on any of us is woven into the very fabric of society -
it grows with each righteously indignant thought we have. The legacy of
neglect is that it is often overlooked because there are no bruises - no
physical evidence - and so it is easier to deny and it easier for survivors
of such neglect to wonder why they are so angry and so full of grief, WHEN
they can get past the numbness that they inhabit most of the time
It is going take everything we have to teach the folks out there that this
is not okay no matter who perpetrates and who is the recipient of such
injury. Can we get beyond picking away at whether men or women are more
guilty, self-righteous, etc., etc., etc.? Can we get beyond our own outrage
enough to see that only our learning to love and teaching (by example)
others will save us? It's going to take everthing inside of us.
[I must admit that it occurred to me in the midst of reading all the
postings on abuse that (gulp) if I see a man with a black eye, for instance,
I am probably more likely to chalk it up to a brawl with the guys than
physical abuse by his wife/girlfriend/mother...I'll think again next time.]
Warm Regards,
LuAnne
"Lovingkindness is drawn to the saint,
as medicine goes to the pain it must cure.
Where there is pain, the remedy follows:
wherever the lowlands are, the water goes.
If you want the water of mercy, make yourself low;
then drink the wine of mercy and be drunk
Mercy upon mercy rises to your head like a flood."
Rumi, Mathnawi, II, 1938-40
From robert.johnston@galadriel.otago.ac.nzTue Oct 17 00:31:37 1995
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 15:44:59 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: communication
Dear Linda,
A response to your letter.
>I find that I seem to look at the world very differently than you and many
>others on Talisman. I feel that I am always being told to be docile and
>accepting of the way things are and that they will somehow magically
>improve.
Foucault writes of the modern cultural construction of "docile bodies", and
some feminists (eg., Valerie Walkerdine, who might have interesting ideas
re. girls and maths for Mary Day) have taken this idea on board. In the
male hegemony the womans voice is compelled into guilty silence... So
Linda, your resistance to docility is probably most praiseworthy. When I
first came onto Talisman I found your voice quite intimidating, I must say.
It had the power to send me into shock! Maybe it still does... But now,
even in my [yesterday] disagreement with you [and Terry], I have come to
find beauty in the encounter. Perhaps I have become stronger, or perhaps
you have come to better appreciate the weakness of my ear drums and have
moderated your tone a little... God forbid that you should ever become
docile!
>On other matters, I find it interesting that discussion of abuse towards
>women is such a divisive matter. Everyone on Talisman is quite willing to
>pay lip service to the equality of men and women. But, boy, when you get
>down to the real issues, then it's into the trenches.
As one of the combitants in this discussion, I must say that I feel that
the letters of today have *felt* much better than earlier ones. Richard,
Terry, John H, Steve [with his tale of innocence and compassion] and Bev
[who has added a great new dimension to Talisman!] -- as well as you --
have widened the discussion into a broader consideration of the issues. No
one has mentioned again, for instance, that it might me a good idea to
castrate sex offenders... The tone has become more moderate, and the range
broader.
Yet, to me, it seems like a
>very basic right of women to be free from the threat of physical abuse.
Yes. I am certain that no one is unaware of your position on this. And I am
equally certain that no one disagrees.
>How about rape? Are you all going say, "men get raped by women too?"
It has happened, and psychologically it is fairly common.
The main issue for me is this: in view of the competing facts that we live
in an increasingly criminal world AND adhere to the belief that humanity is
one and whole, what are the best strategies for dealing with waywardness?
Simplistic solutions won't work. Let me give an instance. In New Zealand
about 50% of gaol populations are Maoris (our indigenous people) and yet
Maoris amount to only about 15% of the total population. Simplistically, it
might be assumed that Maoris are a degenerate people in need of
extermination (or castration for sex offenders). But this kind of solution
represents a serious failure of thought. [If O.J. Simpson's community is
corrupt, what real basis has it for establishing his guilt?] I have no
heart for continuing with the analysis, because I am sure that you can see
what I mean. But I must add this: in view of the fact of the one-ness and
wholeness of humanity, can Baha'is not expect to eventually share muffins
and tea with "criminals", including sex offenders? [I mean: how many saints
do we enroll?] If they cannot, then if they don't want to live in [Baha'i]
communities in which "anything goes", must they not try to promote
strategies which will enable them to both feel secure in the midst of
degeneracy and help remedy that degeneracy? And in this, might they not be
damned if I am too caught up in the faults of the "other"...?
Male violence, it must be remembered, feeds on antagonism and I think that
it is mainly for this reason that I am advocating discursive moderation.
Both the shrill and the docile help perpetuate the cycle, it seems to me.
Yes Linda... I ramble too....
Robert.
From belove@sover.netTue Oct 17 00:32:30 1995
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 95 11:20:19 PDT
From: belove@sover.net
To: DEREK COCKSHUT , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: RE , Marginaliazed
"It is my considored opinion any male who beats a woman is not
worthy of
being called a man. I do not regard any male whom I know has
engaged in
physical and sexual abuse of women and children as worthy of my
consideration and friendship until they have shown a marked
alteration
in their behaviour ."
Please. Which Bahai principle is being exemplified here?
.
I think there is an important difference between taking steps to
control men who are out of control -- very necessary
... and abusing them in the name of teaching them something.
. These guys who abuse are beaten down enough without our adding
to it
I think we have to be more clear headed about this.
We must guard against becoming like cops who take such pleasure
as they
talk about "scum bags" whom they have to control
Of course, this is the nature of abuse.
Abuse tends to attract abuse. Abuse is so hideous that it tends
to make us want to abuse the abuser by punishing him (or her.)
I think the better response has just as clear and decisive, but
more disciplined.
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 10/12/95
Time: 16:12:50
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler --
A. Einstein
From jwinters@epas.utoronto.caTue Oct 17 00:33:38 1995
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 16:03:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: Deconstructionism and the Qur'an ??
Greetings, friends. Please forgive this non-Baha'i use of Talisman...
Please tell me if you can help me with this research project. I am taking
a class of tafsir and we are assigned a paper examining different ways in
which Orientalists have approached the study of the Holy Qur'an. I'm
having difficulty finding out if and where the deconstructionist
methodology of postmodernist discouse has been used to analyze the
Qur'an.
I'll briefly describe the issue, in case it isn't clear what I'm getting
at. As I understand it, deconstructionism, especially that of Derrida,
declares that all language is but a system of interconnecting signs, none
of which express true reality. Briefly, this method holds that all words
merely point to other words, and no matter how closely you examine a
text, all you will understand is the words used and their interrelations,
not what the text actually refers to. Obviously, this will not work for the
Holy Qur'an as believed in by orthodox Islam, in which the (recited)
language of the Qur'an represents the *exact* utterances of God, with not
one phoneme missing. Here the phonemes, or "signs," of the Qur'an *do*
signify a transcendent meaning, albeit one beyond the ken of most humans.
In the jargon of deconstructionism, they are signifiers with a definite
and real signified. (Yes, I am aware of the hadith that there are
multiple meanings for every ayat of the Qur'an, but that doesn't negate
how absolutely orthodox Islam accepts the semantic reality of the text.)
What I am looking for is any references that I can find in which this
approach, or something like it, has been applied to the study of the
Qur'an, for I see hints of there being a fascinating tension here. If you
have come across anything, please let me know. Thank you very much!
-Sincerely, Jonah
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduTue Oct 17 00:34:32 1995
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 95 15:04:44 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: communication
Dear Robert, I do appreciate your open and frank message to me. Me,
intimidating? (I've only been told that a few times before in my life - by an
ex-marine, a tribal Afghani honcho, a few Lebanese Shi'ite men... So, I don't
know where you are getting this idea about me.)
I suppose I was getting overheated. I tend to become very involved with the
people in my life and respond strongly to their suffering. I am no model of
detachment by any means. I agree with the idea that we are all in this world
together and that it is difficult to divide up the world into good and evil.
That was not my point.
I have noticed a trend in American society, though, for relations between men
and women to have deteriorated. I am hardly the only one to have noticed such
things. For example, I met a young black woman in O'Hare one day and we struck
up an instant friendship. One of the first things she asked me was whether I
thought that things were getting worse between men and women. This was
obviously something preying on her mind. Many women are troubled by this and
for very good reason. Women and children are especially vulnerable when things
go awry socially. At this point, I am not blaming any one group. I think a
number of factors came together that contributed to this deterioration - not
the least of them being the sexual liberation movement.
When we intellectuals talk about the equality of men and women, we often refer
to education, job opportunities, career advancement, etc. However, while some
women are definitely benefitting by societal changes, others have been left in
the dust. It's really hard to advance in a job or get a good job to begin with
if you are abandoned by your spouse (or the father of your children) or being
beaten. The statistics are out there. A healthy percentage of people living
in poverty in the U.S. are single women and their children. Because women are
tied to children in a way that men are not, women's life experiences are
extremely different from those of men. Even if women were viewed as equal
competitors in all jobs, they still would be at a tremendous disadvantage just
because they are not free agents. They face pregnancy and are generally the
ones responsible for child care.
Now, I seem to be going off on another tangent. But, actually, I see the abuse
of women and the desertion of women as being very tightly connected. A man is
far more of a free agent than is a woman. A man is far less vulnerable than a
woman. There are reasons to address women's problems separately from men's.
It is not because I want to portray men as evil and women as victims. It is
just that it muddies things way to much if you don't sort out the distinctions.
In fact, I am very much opposed to some feminist thinking because I believe
that some of the more vocal feminists have done a disservice to so many women
in this world by not focusing on some of the very basic problems that women
face.
Man hating is not my message. Rather, it is an expression of hope that men (and
other women, women who are more privileged) will become sensitized to the
particular problems that women face. Robert, you talked about psychological
rape. Have you ever spoken to a woman who has actually been raped? Do you
listen to the words of the Bosnian Muslim women who have been raped by the
Serbs? Believe me, I would much rather be killed than go through what they
have gone through. Then, only my body would be destroyed. But rape destroys
the soul.
I really have said far more on this subject than I had ever intended to here on
Talisman. It is funny. I had this feeling after the O.J. verdict that men -
the kind of men I like, sensitive kind ones, the ones' I imagine Talisman men
being like - would go out on the streets and protest the abuse of women after
they saw what O.J. had gotten away with. I am now marveling at my naivete.
However, I do appreciate a forum where I could express my feeling about a
subject that is of such great concern to me. Thanks all for your patience. I
realize I was a bit strident. Linda
From mcfarlane@upanet.uleth.caTue Oct 17 00:35:09 1995
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 14:59:48 -0600
From: Gordon McFarlane
To: bahai-faith@oneworld.wa.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Baha'i Faith and Mental Illness
Dear Friend
I thank you for your post and pray that it will stimulate some in
depth consultation on the issue of Baha'i attitudes towards mental illness
and not just a flurry of patronizing cliche's and recitals of the "6
Requisites for Spiritual Growth".
Such illness is indeed a burden and as Baha'is I believe we can do
much much more than simply "hope that scientist will find better and more
permanent cures." I myself plead guilty to frequently avoiding, not only
those individuals who are so afflicted, but the issue itself, even though I
suffer frequent and sever depressions during which nothing gets me more hot
under the collar than some pompus individual patting me on the shoulder and
telling me, in their most condescending and pretentious
"thank-you-for-sharing-that-with-me" manner, that If I said my obligatory
prayers with "pure hearted devotion", read the Baha'i scriptures daily "with
reverance attention and thought", taught the Faith etc. etc. etc., that God
will "dispel (my) sadness, solve (my) difficulties and remove (my)
afflictions." I do not doubt the truth of Baha'u'llah's words! I do doubt
that the purveyors of platitudes among us have any deeper understanding of
them than I.
Several years ago I read a transcript of a talk by one of the
counsellors (I can't recall the name and would appreciate somebody posting
the exact quote) who stated that the tests faced by the North American
Baha'is would be as great if not greater than those faced by the Persian
Baha'is - but that they would be psychological tests. I see the evidence of
this all about me.
There is an exellent article dealing with mental illness "The Black
Dogs of Depression" by John Bentley Mays in the November '93 issue of
Saturday night magazine. (If you are unable to locate it I would be happy to
send you a photocopy) In it, he makes the statement . . "The beauty of the
Beloved hides itself, perhaps for our sakes: for ony the hardiest souls have
been able to live continuously in the vicintity of that furnace". (pg. 97)
Mays is referring, of course, to his own Christian faith, but I find this an
interesting idea to reflect upon. Who are the hardy souls? Are they the
serene, unflapppable, unflinching, all-molasses-no-beans types, or are they
the burden bearers? I'm certainly not the judge!
Another interesting quote from Mays -
"We live and draw up the plans for our existence within a fabric
being snatched to shreds by incomprehensible economic booms and busts,
instant fashions, corporate and private greed, self-serving desire, and the
spectacle of consumption. And all this, under the aegis of a vague moral
relavitism and social pointlessness, paraded under the name of "liberalism"
or "freedom" that resembles every depressive's terrible, individual
experience of the world. You really do need a doctor if you think you can
live in a high capitalist urban culture - stepping over the bodies of
homeless people sleeping on the streets on your way to buy a $400 toaster
you don't need - and be cheery - or if you somehow imagine that Eli Lilly
and Company won't do whatever it takes this year to boost its Prozac sales
over the 1.2 billion it racked up last year on that product alone!"
Bud, I am pleased to hear from you and I am pleased to hear that
you are working as a freelance writer. I personally believe that writing is
about the best therapy of all. As W.O. Mitchel put it, "You've got to write
the crap out." Keep writing! Eventually the well will come clean.
I noticed you posted this on bahai-faith@oneworld.wa.com. I have
taken the liberty of cc'ing this response along with your posting to
talisman@indiana.edu I would be interested in reading the responses and
insights of some of the Baha'is on that mailing list. Thanks again for
bringing up this issue - and hang in there! We need you!
Loving Baha'i Greetings
Gord.
P.S. "To Merit the madness of love, man must abound in sanity" (whatever
that means) -The Seven Valleys.
Several years ago I attended a National convention near Orillia
Ontario. Dr. Hossaine Danesh (a wonderful man and great entertainer) was
elected chairman on the first day and during the break, my room mate, who
was a prison psychologist, said "Leave it to the Baha'is to hold a
convention and elect a psychiatrist with a name like 'Who's sane?' as their
chairman."
>Dear friends,
>
> I am 45 and have been a Baha'i since 1970 -- for 25 years. For
>even longer, 27 years, I have had bipolar disorder (manic depression).
>After a recent nine day hospitalization following a three month manic
>episode, I am reflecting on the relationship between our Faith and
>mental illness.
>
> From a letter on behalf of the Guardian, April 12, 1948: "Let
>us hope in the meantime that scientists will find better and more
>permanent cures for the mentally afflicted. But in this world such
>illness is truly a heavy burden to bear!"
>
> I have lost jobs, had marriages fail and become disabled to the
>point that I can no longer hold a regular job. I now work, however, as
>a freelance writer.
>
> My illness is, indeed, "a heavy burden to bear." My sixth
>psychiatrist finally diagnosed my illness four years ago. So I suffered
>for 23 years without knowing why.
>
> I have found little help or solace from the Faith. My bipolar
>disorder and the Faith seem to be mutually exclusive. Yet we are told,
>"Very little is yet known about the mind and its inner workings. But
>one thing is certain: Baha'is can and do receive a very remarkable help
>and protection in this world, one which often surprises thier doctors
>very much!" (from a letter on behalf of the Guardian, April 9, 1948)
>
> Despite earnest prayer and study of the writings, such help and
>protection has not been forthcoming. Why doesn't it work for me? There
>are times -- forgive me -- when I rage at and curse God because I am so
>frustrated. I am thawrted in what I might accomplish in the world and
>in service to the Faith.
>
> We are taught that no soul is tested beyond its endurance, but
>when I lay me down at night I have manic depression. And when I awake
>in the morning I still have manic depression. An episode of depression
>or mania could start today, another hospitalization at anytime. Just
>how much and how long must I be tested?
>
> When one person in a family has a mental illness, every member
>of the family suffers. I have seen this in my own family and in other
>families. How do I explain my behavior to my six-year-old son? And my
>daughter who is 14 worries that she will have bipolar disorder.
>
> I had no income during my three month bout of mania. We had no
>money, not even a nickel, for the past two weeks. We went to the food
>pantry for emergency food and got poor relief to pay for all my
>medications. So my family suffers anxiety and uncertainty.
>
> Then there is the social stigma that comes with mental illness.
>I am shunned or mistrusted by some people. And I am sorry to say that I
>have been rejected or ignored by Baha'i "friends" when they learned of
>my condition. And some Baha'is tell me I should pray more and harder or
>be a better Baha'i and my condition would improve. God forgive them
>their ignorance and lack of compassiion.
>
> Mood disorders and schizoprenia probably have genetic triggers
>and are certainly biochemical in nature. Do we expect a diabetic to
>pray away their illness? I do not understand what 'Abdu'l-Baha meant
>when he said, "Sometimes, if the nervous system is paralysed through
>fear , a spiritual remedy is necessary. Madness, incurable otherwise,
>can be cured through prayer." ("Throne of the Inner Temple, p. 70)
>
> I hope that Baha'i mental health professionals, Baha'is with a
>mental illness and those with a mentally-ill family member can begin to
>discuss these issues. If you do not wish to post to this newsgroup,
>email me if you like. It is time that we start to develop an approach
>to mental illness and to those so afflicted in our community.
>
>In His Service,
>BP
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>Return-Path:
---
Gordon McFarlane e-mail: MCFARLANE@upanet.uleth.ca
Public Access Internet
The University of Lethbridge
From Alethinos@aol.comTue Oct 17 00:36:02 1995
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 00:43:47 -0400
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Spiritual Disease
Mr. Paul Johnson:
I have to wonder if you have actually met and dealt with a covenant-breaker?
Have you ever met a soul so egocentric that is unable to conceptualize the
world apart from themselves?
You are right. It is all about control. And it is certainly true that in the
name of preserving the status quo people seeking truth have been branded
heritics, covenant-breakers etc. Certainly Jesus was marked as such. So was
Muhammad and Moses and the Bab.
But the control rests in souls so super-saturated with their ego's pathetic
world-view that they cannot stand the thought that they may be in error. They
are sick. If you have ever met someone such as this you would know.
I have met covenant-breakers and dealt with them, sometimes by the dozens.
But I have also met people within their ranks that never were *baha'is*. They
ended up following one of these personas without ever really investigating
the Faith.
And I have met other people - who have nothing to do with the Faith, who have
these same traits. And we can see some of these same types nightly on the
news and on the front pages of our newspapers.
The disease begins in a soul, and spreads - looking for others pre-disposed
to this *warping*. A perfect example would be Hitler and his inner circle.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From robert.johnston@galadriel.otago.ac.nzTue Oct 17 00:36:21 1995
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 18:24:02 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: communication
Ffolks,
Both Linda and John H. have written on the subject of rape and fairly --
surely -- represent it as something hideous. Recently in New Zealand a
man from South Auckland, tagged "The South Auckland Serial Rapist" was
caught, convicted and sent to prison. The victim count was -- well, I
can't remember what it was, but maybe it was in the hundreds. At the time
of his apprehension I felt, rather dispassionately,that it would be best
for all concerned if he were put to death.
The story came out the he came from an especially troubled childhood
environment. So it goes...
I recall hearing [something like] that human suffering is one of the three
mysteries that we can never comprehend in this world (don't ask me what the
other two are), and my mind boggles whenever I think about it. What can I
say? May God protect us all from violent tests. Somehow we are not to be
sorrowful and grieved. Nor to focus too much on the negative things of
life.
Linda, you wrote:
Thanks all for your patience. I
>realize I was a bit strident.
Perhaps this is the way your story needs to be expressed. Who knows. So
we continue...
Robert.
From TLCULHANE@aol.comTue Oct 17 00:36:47 1995
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 14:54:57 -0400
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: communication
Dear Friends,
Gee we are experiencing a posting traffic I can absorbe . Maybe we
need more frequent ABS conferences . :)
John and Robert have both touched on something that hits home deep in
my soul . John commented on his sense of " repulsion " at rape and sometimes
feeling mad at himself for not " distinguishing myself from my own gender ."
Robert touched on the not being " sorrowful and grieved " and not focusing
" . too much on the negative things of life ."
I share with John that inner tension of the behavior of many of my gender
and how to distinguish myself from it . How does one offer an alternative
sense of what it means to be a man . I think many of us feel a deep sense of
revulsion and yet know that we looking for something more to offer than our
anger or at times despair .
Robert spoke of focus on what negativity or . .? . So often I have
seen within myself and communities the spiritual tension involved with this
being reduced to a "happy guys" kind of escapism . I think here of Abdu l
Baha saying "be happy " and Baha u llah in the Fire Tablet or the Tablet of
Ahmad with . ." remember My days during thy days and My distress and
banishment in this remote prison ." I wonder if in our secular
sophistication we have missed something of the truth of an older Christain
sense of Atonement and Redemption.? In the Aqdas there is a passage I am
particularly drawn to it is K158 Say: Because He bore injustice , justice
hath appeared on earth , and because He accepted abasement , the majesty of
God hath shone forth amidst mankind ."
Might not this reality begun in the Siyah Chal have something to offer to
the world . In the face of the horrific oppressions of the human story I draw
comfort and strength from Bahau llah s suffering . I find in the Siyah Chal
experience a model of redemptive suffering that gives humanity some of the
most beautiful mystical prayer/poetry I have ever encountered. This awe
inspiring devotion of the lover for the Beloved . There also is the going
forth armed with this love and challenging the Rulers of the world .
Somehow . somewhere in His life there is a model for , if not resolving the
tension I think Robert and John seem to begetting at, at least teaching us
how to live and work with it all the while bathed in the Grace of the All
Merciful . I don tknow how all this works or even how to respond to it all
that well on a daily basis but I thank Linda and John and Robert for raising
it in such a humanly honest way. Maybe the honest recognition of the sorrows
and wounds we have all encountered wil show us a way forward past the pain to
a better way of "being " and acting in the world . Would it not be
"meaningful " to offer the suffering Baha ullah to the victims of violence
and oppression ? I dont know but in my own case it is what "saved" me from
the presonal experience of the horrors of war .
warmest regards ,
Terry
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduTue Oct 17 00:37:08 1995
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 15:55:59 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
This is wonderful. Now we can really talk. I too want to thank John and
Robert for their comments, but also want to add Terry's name to the list.
I
John's comments about men in bars and rape really does open a can of worms, and
I cannot, as usual, resist taking a peek inside (without letting all those
creepy worms out).
T
I remember when I read someone or another writing about rape and declaring all
men potential rapists and, in fact, declaring all heterosexual sex rape. (Oh,
puhlease!) What an insult this was to the men in my life - my gentle husband,
my dear brothers, my father, my father-in-law, my sons, all my male friends!
I still maintain that none of them could commit rape. Yet, I also have had to
come to terms that the world probably can't be divided into
[End of file]
come to terms that the world probably can't be divided into
I
A
rapists/non-rapists. The situation in Bosnia, of course, has thrust the issue
before our eyes, but, while the scale and the rationale of the rape in this
case makes it (I hope) unusual, rape is and always has been a part of warfare.
And the soldiers who are raping are also brothers, fathers, husbands, lovers.
I remember reading Solzhenizen's Prussian Nights which ends with a rape by a
$ v
soldier. While S. is not justifying it, he is giving it a human dimension, yet
one that is very hard for a woman to understand.
Every so often I read of an account of a rape that is unusually chilling. A
man stopped to help a woman with a flat tire one night. He said that he really
did intend to simply help her. But, then, he was suddenly overcome with
something - rage, passion, whatever - and raped her.
Interrupt 9_tBx|<=WOePt zh
Rape and the threat of rape is one of those things that deeply divideds males
and females (though I do know that men are raped in prisons and that boy
children are raped). In general, though, rape is an act by a man against a
woman. Even the discussion of the issue divides us. It is very hard for a
woman to understand why a man would rape and, I think it is hard for many men
to understand how devastating it is to a woman.
For me, talking about the equality of men and women is very complex. Perhaps
what I find most important is understanding each other's perspectives on things
so that we can appreciate each others' value.
Just one other little note. John and I were walking through the woods today
and we talked about Talisman. I said I had come to understand better why we
should avoid labeling one another through the process of writing on Talisman.
How many times have I read things and thought to myself, "that guy's comments
are outrageous!" , only to tune in a day or two later and find that that same
"jerk" has some really interesting insights to share.
Anyway, if anyone wants to comment on my musings, I'd be interested. Linda
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzTue Oct 17 00:38:06 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 12:16:35 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu,
TLCULHANE@aol.com
Subject: like a lonely walker in deep snow
Ffolks,
When I read the postings from Linda and Terry today, I almost wept, though
I am in a room in which there are other people. I must say this discussion
has sobered my mind. I am slowed, like a lonely walker in deep snow. I
stop and think like a lost traveller at the fork in a road.
I am rather afraid to write anything more. Searching my mind, a fragment
of thought shows itself. It has an historical slant....
When Linda writes of men as rapists, given is an extreme instance of the
corruption of the reality of men as rulers. Men, through centuries --
millenia -- of patriarchy have ruled, sometimes justly, oftentimes not.
History is history of bloodshed. Even in those times when men have ruled
unjustly, however, God did not withdraw their right to rule. Until today,
when sexual equality is God's decree.
Given the limitations inherent in patriarchy, and the present chaotic
period of transition between two vastly different universal paradigms, the
presence of men as rapists, though not at all excusable, ought not be all
that surprising. Afterall his is the hour in which good and evil are
enjoined in their mightiest battle. What an amazingly mixed blessing it is
to be alive in the world in this hour!
I think Terry hit the mark when he pointed to the need for happiness to be
something more profound than the excessively jolly and nerve jangling
"happy guys" variety. The apprehension of suffering, as he says, gives us
the occasion to go more deeply into ourselves, to establish more secure
foundations for whatever it is that is happiness. Linda has brought to our
attention an inescapable thought, which has men oppressing women in a way
which is utterly degenerate. Yet, in doing so, she -- in the context of an
open-minded and frank discussion -- has enabled us (the sexes) to get
closer, I think. Maybe this is something of a miracle. Time will tell.
May God protect us all.
Robert.
From PXQ00435@niftyserve.or.jpTue Oct 17 00:38:49 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 09:09:00 +0900
From: "K. BABB"
To: TALISMAN@indiana.edu
Subject: It happens in Japan, too
Absolutely, Linda! I for one can't even begin to fathom
rape, an act that not only does physical harm, but can
literally destroy the psyche and soul of another human
being. Taking a gun and killing the person would be
far more merciful. And to think that rapists have no
concept of this. It must take a sick man to do such a
thing, or at least someone whose wires are a bit crossed
upstairs.
I don't know if it has been in the U.S. news, but last
month THREE American soldiers on Okinawa raped a Japanese
junior high school girl, (not that nationality or race is
the issue. Or maybe it is!). My husband's reaction startled
me (he too is such a gentle guy). He said, "They should be
castrated. No question about it. I'd see that EVERYTHING
was cut off." To think, three huge physically trained men
against a small defenseless girl---it's sick! What goes on
in such men's heads? In their hearts? Personally, I think
castrating is too good for them.
The Japanese government wants to bring them to trial, but
(lucky for the GIs) the Status of Arms Agreement with the U.S.
doesn't permit it. Needless to say the government here is
trying hard to change that. I doubt that I've ever seen the
Diet move so quickly (except in the case where they hurried
to push through a vote to send Peacekeeping troups to the
Gulf---involvement in war is constitutionally prohibited).
I don't know what the Japanese punishment is for rape. Thank
God it's something that happens so infrequently here! I feel
perfectly safe walking down the streets of Hiroshima at night
or having my daughter out on her own. But I know of other
foreign women, living in the larger cities like Tokyo or Osaka,
who don't feel the same, who have actually had bad experiences.
I count myself lucky.
This whole issue of the weak and the strong reminds me of a
climatic scene from A FEW GOOD MEN. After receiving the
verdict of dishonorable discharge for accidentally causing the
death of a fellow Marine, Dobson (one of the accused) turned
to Harold (who was higher in rank, and his fellow perpetrator)
and says, "Why? I don't understand why? We were just doing
our job." (They had been ordered by their Leiutant to harrass
a fellow Marine, who was trying to get a transfer to a different
unit, because he had health problems that the doctor and his
commanding officers didn't want to acknowledge.) Harold, much
wiser than Dobson, replies. "No, we didn't do our job. Our job
was to protect the weak who can't protect themselves. It was our
job to protect Willie." I have thought about this over and over.
Yes, it's everyone's job, everyone's responsibility under God to
protect those weaker than themselves. It is sad that a lot of
people don't realize this.
Sorry for "dwelling on the unpleasant things of life."
Lovingly, Kathleen
From dpeden@imul.comTue Oct 17 00:40:32 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 95 07:50:36+030
From: Don Peden
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: violence
A word keeps coming to mind, and it finds confirmation in each letter I
read....vulnerability.
Baha'u'llah allowed himself to be vulnerable during his suffering...he
certainly had the power, had he chosen to enforce it, to have things happen
differently...yet he allowed his vulnerability to stand. It allowed
humankind the opportunity to respond.
Women are vulnerable, for the most part, as are children, weak inmates in
prison, defeated nations, and other victims of violent acts.
So, what is it in our history/make-up/training, etc., which makes us despise
and attack vulnerability? What is it that makes us wish to rush to the
forfront to defend the vulnerable? What makes us "flex" our invulnerability
(the bar scene and other senerios) and deny what is vulnerable in us?
When you take the discussion to this level, we again go beyond gender and
return to a human condition, and perhaps get to something we can get a
handle on. Women also build up defenses against vulnerability...it is the
pack mentality...and women are very capable of attacking another women
verbally, mentally, and even physically. I have seen it, experience it, and
even been part of it. Shunning, name calling, despising, vindictiveness,
gossip, enjoying the misfortunes of another because they "deserve it", even
beating...are these not a woman's way of committing "rape"? Soap operas
abound and are going global!
Sure, the act of raping a woman is one of the pinnacles of manifestation of
this phenomena, but perhaps our response to the extremes are causing us to
overlook some of the root causes, and perhaps our own vulnerability
(although I have been touched and moved by the courage of the men in this
discussion to be vulnerable).
Vulnerability is not a four letter word. It is neither manly, nor womanly,
and yet we give it a gender.
In many of the mystical passages of Baha'u'llah, he keeps referring to a
relationship so intimate as to be sexual. If it were not for vulnerability,
(to be explicit, a woman's willingness to allow penetration) the act of sex
can not occur except with violence. There are great and wonderful secrets
to be discovered in Baha'u'llah's use of this analogy. He doesn't do things
by chance.
Could it be that vulnerability itself is one of the pre-requisites for
spiritual communion? How can we be participants in a spiritual communion if
we do not allow ourselves to be vulnerable?
And then, how do we put that vulnerability into play in our "outside" lives?
If we are to "live" what we believe, what form does that take? Because as
we all know, if you allow your vulnerability to show to others, they'll
often respond in a negative way. Yet, how can the Faith possibly spread
without us taking that risk?
I'm not offering answers...I'd be rich and famous if I could. But when I
think of "healing", when I think of "future", I think of mankind in intimate
exchange with each other, vulnerable, compassionate, loving. I think of a
humankind in intimate exchange with God, or the Manifestation, in a position
of vulnerability, loving, submitting to penetration, and then turning around
and lavishing the afterglo of such an exchange on their waiting and loving
"family". (Yes, I've been told I am a romantic, but then I think
Baha'u'llah had that quality too. It's hard to have a vision without it.)
For that matter, how can we encourage that spiritual quality of
vulnerability if we continually "rape" each other with our words within the
Baha'i Community? Is our need to be "right", to "condemn the ideas of
others", to "sit in judgement" on who "is or isn't" a reflection of the pack
mentality? The early Gnostics had the same difficulty with the early
Christian church. The early Christians wanted to use Christ's words as a
club or a sword to define membership, and enforce a code of behaviour to
that membership so it could be "distinguished" from others. (It is what has
made me withdraw from the Baha'i community. Until I can come to terms with
this phenomena, I can not be part of a Baha'i community, and can not call
myself a Baha'i. But that is my own personal struggle.)
And where is the balance between avoidance of using words and condemnation
(no matter how polite) as a tool to commit violence on the soul of another,
and using language as a legitimate tool of enquiry after truth?
We gloss over it with nice words, but, again, unless we can change the way
we view some of these issues, we are repeating history. If it happens in
other communities, and we all come from other communities, and are still
part of other communities (ie., the academic community, previous religious
communities, governmental communities) who are engaging in political and
power based decision making, how do we change things around? What are we
missing in our models? (There have been some models presented which use the
US Judicial system as a model, and although it may have it's good points,
there are some gapping holes in that model that a train could drive through.
I'm not convinced that is what Baha'u'llah had in mind. I'm holding out for
something a bit fresher.)
Don, my husband has a question. He's not quite ready to sit down and write,
but he asked me to take his question to you.
"What is the difference between the "Baha'i Cause" and the "Baha'i
Community"? And please, no retoric. We've had 25 years of that.
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlTue Oct 17 00:41:32 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 12:39:58 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re:copyright & divorce
FROM Sonja van Kerkhoff
Re: copyright and Talisman:
David, I have found all your postings inspiring and often insightful,
thanks for sharing so much so honestly.
Sometimes, something posted on Talisman is something that I wish to
print in ARTS DIALOGUE, and it never occured to me to ever print
anything, however little it was without the author's permission.
I see it more a matter of courtesy and striving to be professional. I
think it is a pity that the NSA didn't first ask your permission to print
the letter, because I don't see any reason why they didn't, except that
perhaps it was an oversight, and we all do that.
So while Talisman is public in that any one may participate, listen,
copy and pass on, I still view the 'ownership' of the words as remaining
with the authors.
RE: Divorce:
Linda I was one of those teenagers that badly needed the feeling of
security seen in a 'normal' family, and my parents were living (and
fighting) in the same house.
I was lucky that there were a few caring parents of friends of mine who
made all the difference at the time. One in particular, herself a divorced
woman who was clearly lonely herself, let me stay whenever things got
too violent, and I'll never forget her kindness, even though I probably
stayed around 5 or so days in total, and I was so grateful that I cleaned
her house for her whenever I was there (I am looking forward to this
when my sons bring their friends to stay).
So, coming from my background, I don't see divorce per se as a bad
thing, although who knows what affect it would have had if that had've
happened. Out of the 9 children only 2 are in long term relationships
and I am surprised that I am one of them.
>From this perspective I think there is a lot of luck in marriage,
but it is true I rarely see happily married couples, and feel this really
diminishes heaps of things. It seems almost to be the norm that
happiness is just getting by.
I agree Burl, that attention should be given to childrearing, but it's not
only women who do this (we been through all this before, so I'll give
that a rest), and although you were probably referring to the majority of
families, I think that the focus should be on the education in principle
in order to move beyond any said situation.
While Sen & I were in New Zealand we participated in a weekend
marriage workshop along with 6 other couple which was fantastic. We
got to see each other differently as well as to relate intensely with
another man or women, since many exercises were done with different
partners. I think this sort of thing would be great for everyone (not only
those who were married as this workshop was for), for I see the issue
as being more one of learning to develop caring relationships, etc.
I also participated in a marriage workshop that Agnes Ghavzani did
(this was by pure chance actually because I usually run a mile from
anything at a Bahai event with such a title), and we all had to choose
partners to discuss how we would live together. Later everyone shared
with the group what was decided. It was very telling, and actually I
think a good exercise, even though I cringed when it was taken for
granted by most couples that the women would stop work. Well, Agnes
and i were partners and we decided that we were too busy to have
children!
Sonja
From Quanta@bwc.orgTue Oct 17 00:41:43 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 95 14:06:06 IST
From: Quanta@bwc.org
To: talisman
Subject: greetings
Loving prayers and greetings from the Holy Land
to you all.
Allah-u-Abha
Quanta Dawn-Light
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduTue Oct 17 00:44:23 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 95 10:29:42 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: vulnerability
I probably shouldn't post anything this morning. I haven't really gathered my
thoughts since reading Farzin's, Bev's, and Sonja's postings - all of which
were extremely interesting. They have sent my thoughts off on many tangents.
I will limit myself for the moment to a reflection or two on the themes of
suffering and vulnerability. I don't think one can be a parent without
thinking of these things frequently. I have a a very close friend with a son
facing eight years in prison and a daughter who is acting out in various ways.
The words "vulnerability" and "suffering" are two words that come up frequently
as we chat over coffee. Ideas of "self-fulfillment" and "achievement" seem to
dominate my conversations less and less as our children and their friends face
these critical years of adolescence. I thought as they grew older I would feel
freer to set fix my sights on my own goals and let them live their lives, but
that is not how it is.
Motherhood is a constant process of self sacrifice from the day of conception.
I don't think that can ever change and I don't think it really should ever
change. Someone has to be relied upon to be "always there" for the child.
This generally falls to the mother (while I allow that there are cases where
someone else can play this role.) But the image of "the mother" as the stable
force in the family who gives uncondtional love is an important one for
children to hold in their minds. I think it is a vital image for children to
carry into adulthood. It is a model that they can use for their own actions
later in life. Self sacrifice and vulnerability tend to go hand in hand, at
least in my mind. You can't put up walls of defense to protect yourself if
your main concern is the lives of others.
I want to clarify that it is not "suffering" and "vulnerability" that I see as
bad. My harangues of the last week or so have been against unnecessary
brutality - taking advantage of someone who is weaker. Bev's comments about
the verbal brutality of women are well taken. I have been the brunt of this
myself and know its pain. I also think that much of the ill will women feel
towards each other is conditioned by the degree of competition we feel exists
among us. If a man is allowed more than one partner, for example, is it
surprising that women would feel threatened by another woman as a competitor
for her man's affections. When women feel secure in a relationship, their
attitudes and behaviors towards other women tend to be far more healthy and
cordial.
You all have raised many more issues than the ones I am addressing.
Bev, you asked about the Baha'i Cause vs. the Baha'i community. For me,
religion is very much a human endeavor. It is what we make of it. Scripture
and action can't be neatly sorted out. We are always in the process of
interpreting and acting upon our own interpretations and having to deal with
the interpretatons and actions of others. The scripture provides a certain
world view and parameters within which to work, but even these are constantly
in the process of being widened or narrowed depending on the previous
experiences of groups and individuals. Perhaps this does not adddress your
husband's question at all, but it sent my thoughts going in this direction.
Love, Linda
From lua@sover.netTue Oct 17 00:46:53 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 12:26:26 -0400
From: LuAnne Hightower
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Sorrowful and Grieved
Dear Ones,
Robert wrote:
>Somehow we are not to be sorrowful and grieved. Nor to focus too much on
>the negative things of life.
I believe the quote is "I will no longer be sorrowful and grieved..."
If we interpret this to mean that we are at no time to feel our sorrow or
our grief, then what's the point of saying daily "Thou seest, O my God, how
my tears prevent me from remembering Thee and extolling Thy virtues..."?
Seems to me that there is an appropriate response to injury and loss -
sorrow and grief. The hard part is to know when these feelings are in
response to real suffering or the false suffering that covers over our real
hurts. The writings are replete with references to the suffering and
anguish of the central figures of our Beloved Faith. If they are not immune
to such feelings, how can we believe that we, lowly as we are, are being
called upon not to feel. Where and when we give vent to our emotions and
our intention in so doing is the point. Some of the best "venting" I've
ever read is in the Fire Tablet.
Personally, if I am made to feel that I shouldn't be feeling such and such,
how can come to terms with the feelings? I find the the accessibility I
have to my own feelings makes me much more available to sit with others in
their difficult times, to be compassionate, to remained detached from my own
issues in the face of theirs. The more we repress and deny our own
emotional reality, the more triggered we can be by the emotions of those
around us.
There are times when it is entirely appropriate to focus on the unpleasant
things of life. We can't ask for release from negative attributes if we
never get to the point of identifying them. The whole exercise of trying to
mirror forth the attributes of God brings me repeatedly in touch with their
negative aspects. Just try for a while to be accepting of EVERYONE, and see
how many judgements you still hold in your possession. Isn't this part of
the Bounty of God? How can we polish the mirror when we refuse to look at
the tarnish? We should avoid getting swallowed up in examining the tarnish,
or using it as an excuse, but becoming acquainted with it, after all, gives
us impetus for prayers.
As for our attitudes towards those who do harm, may they come to know the
Mercy of their Lord.
Loving Regards,
LuAnne
From Dave10018@aol.comTue Oct 17 00:47:33 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 12:44:05 -0400
From: Dave10018@aol.com
To: snoopy@skipper.physics.sunysb.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: PLEASE READ AND REPLY!!
In a message dated 95-10-12 21:27:16 EDT, carl@grapevine-sys.com (Carl Hawse)
writes:
>a
>while, they build up so I delete the unread ones and start fresh. If there
>is a controversy or other hot topic (women on the house, etc.) then I may
>skip over the slow-read stuff for a while. That does NOT mean I'm not
>interested. Just distracted.
>
>
Carl's observations and suggestion seem very to the point. Many times I have
had thoughts about the slow read but never got them out. The slow read always
seems too fast! Perhaps we could go through a "fast" slow read, adding
historical context, which people like Juan and Stephen and Christopher have
at the ready, and then circle back for more "subjective" responses. The
slow-read of the long obligatory prayer, for example, went by like a freight
train. I would like to try to catch that one again! It seems to me whatever
we look at we will find the issues we need to thrash out. The Iqan would be a
good subject as well as the Hidden Words. It seems a a good metaphor for the
Revelation would be a hologram, as in a hologram every part contains a
representation of every other part.
David Taylor
From mfoster@tyrell.netTue Oct 17 00:48:43 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 12:34:12 -0500 (EDT)
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: "Stephen R. Friberg"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: violence
Talismanians -
First, hello to all of you I had the pleasure and blessing of meeting
face to face in San Francisco. None of you looked anything like I
expected! Ah, well, it is the heart that really matters .
Second, Re: the differences between the Baha'i community and the Baha'i
Cause, as I see it the Cause of God is God's Causing of creation. It is
one of the three conditions (at least) of the plane of Manifestation or
"the divine Appearance and heavenly Splendor" which distinguishes the
rational soul of the Prophet from that of regular humans. If one
considers the reported statement of `Abdu'l-Baha's that nothing can be
accomplished without "knowledge, volition and action," then, as I see it,
the knowledge of God is the Word (the Logos), the Will (Love or Covenant)
of God is divine volition, and the Cause (Law) of God is divine action.
The Cause of God is a sequence of origins in the world of human reason.
OTOH (on the other hand), the Baha'i community is the sui generis (of its
own kind) grouping of those who have committed themselves to the Covenant
(Will or love) of God. Certainly, there is a connection between the Cause
of God and the Baha'i community. For example, Paul identified the
resurrected body of Christ with the church, while the Master said that it
referred to the Cause of God.
Loving greetings,
Mark Foster
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlTue Oct 17 00:51:24 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 22:09:49 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: no to violence -from Sonja
FROM SONJA VAN KERKHOFF
Thanks to Terry for stressing the need to educate sons (and
I would add daughters) to say no to violence.
My childhood experiences and the other instances of
violence that I fortunately only ever heard about second-
hand, stress to me that the real issue is power.
Many women are powerless, particularly when they have
children to care for.
When society is such that women (and of course men, but
it is usually women who are in this predicament) get
support to move out of violent situations and when the
violators are punished by society at large. That is, that
people will not accept this sort of behaviour. And it is
often a women who feels powerless who puts up with such
abuse. Then there will be less domestic violence. My
mother was as physically strong as my father but she was
financially dependent on him.
I have forgotten how many times that I have been
reprimanded, by well meaning women usually, for
travelling alone at night. Once I was even told that it
would be my own fault if someone (a man) attacked me,
for putting myself at risk. Society should not accept that it
is ok for a man to go out at night while it is not safe for a
women. OK, OK I am not advocating being unwise, etc,
but my point is that many women are fearful of travelling
alone, and for good reason too. And what surprises me is
that so many people seem to either accept this or are
resigned to this.
It is an issue of educating girls (and boys) to feel secure
mentally and physically. If women are empowered by
knowing that they can physically (and mentally look after)
defend themselves that is not advocating violence, but
rather enpowerment (and freedom).
regards, Sonja
From mcfarlane@upanet.uleth.caTue Oct 17 00:51:50 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 15:34:57 -0600
From: Gordon McFarlane
To: Don Peden
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: violence & vulnerability & questions
>So, what is it in our history/make-up/training, etc., which makes us despise
>and attack vulnerability? What is it that makes us wish to rush to the
>forfront to defend the vulnerable? What makes us "flex" our invulnerability
>(the bar scene and other senerios) and deny what is vulnerable in us?
Dear Friend:
I love this question and will have to restrain myself from going on
and on. Excuse me if this sounds nuts. (1st admission of vulnerability. I
am fearful of displaying my ignorance among this esteemed group of scholars
and having my flimsy facade of knowlege penetrated by the slings and arrows
of those more knowledgeable than I) Ahh yes! we men hate our own
vulnerability, and love it in others - ("Not to go on all fours. Are we
not men? That is the law!") . The irony is, that the more we try to hide
it in shame, the more we try to portray ourselves as invulnerable - the
more vulnerable we become. We flaunt and magnify our strengths in order to
ignore our weaknesses and in so doing, leave our secret parts unguarded.
Could it really be that male violence is a manifestation of our irrational
fear of our own weaknesses? It's certainly an interesting place to start a
discussion. And where does this convoluted notion that vulnerability is a
shameful and terrible attribute for men to possess and a virtue in woman?
Ours is the duty to protect and defend, "are we not men". And what on
earth do we do when we're told by "ungrateful" women or children - "We
don't want your protection! we don't need your defense!" My goodness, what
an affront!
"I testify, at this moment, to my powerless and to Thy
might, to My poverty and to Thy wealth". Male or Female, old or young,
rich or poor, learned or unlearned, weak or powerful, we are all admonished
to recite these lines daily. What is the noon prayer if not a confession of
our vulnerability.
In '84, the family service agency I was working with attempted to
initiate a support group for abusive men. This was suggested by several
clients. My job was to develop a brochure on the program and promote it. I
made the mistake of sending the information to a radio talk show host who
used it as an excuse to launch a harrangue about "cowards wimps and scumbags
who abused their faimilies and then tried to justify their behavior with the
flimsy excuse that they 'couldnt communicate or express their feelings any
other way' ". A venomous and violent barrage of calls followed and
continued for a full week. Practically all the callers agreed with the host.
The few that were courageous enough to take issue with his remarks were
rudely dismissed as purveyors of nonsense. No men showed up for the group
and the program was scrapped. In this case, a few men testified to their
powerlessness, acknowledged their vulnerability, sought help and were
violently rebuked.
Please don't get me wrong. I loathe abusive behavior as much as any
of you and consider rape and child abuse to be the most loathsome and
cowardly acts of all. And yet I recognize the chained demon lurking within
every one of us. And I fear it.
Testifying to our powerless, our vulnerability, may well be the
first and most important step we can take in order to empower ourselves to
become fully human.
Similarly, testifying to our ignorance, may well be the first and
most important step we can take on the path of knowledge.
Forgive me for my long windedness and anecdotal style but I'm
something of a knit-wit in that my wits are so inextricably "knit" together
that I can't display a sample of the fabric without pulling our the whole
damned bolt.
What finally persuaded me to accept Baha'u'llah and enroll in this
wonderful Faith, after a year of investigation and many hours of reading
and discussing, was the name of a month on the Baha'i Calendar: Masa'il
(Questions).
Pointing at the calendar on the wall, I asked my host, "Why do you
have all these wierd names for months of the year - Soverignty, Dominion,
Words, Questions?"
He wasn't really sure of his answer, but explained that as far as he
understood, the names of the months were also names of the attributes of God.
"So why," I asked, "Would 'questions' be considered an attribute of
an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God? Why, in heavens name, would he
need to question anything."
My host laughed heartily and replied, "That's a damned good question
Gord!"
That was the shortest, most important, and probably the most
misinformed "fireside" I had attended.
The proper exercise of our capacity to question requires
acknowlegement of our lack of knowledge and intelligent use of our
ignorance. It requires acknowledgement of our powerlessness and weakness,
our vulnerability. It is a capacity that allows us to become receptive to
the outpourings of God's knowledge, mercy and love.
Well, there are many thoughts flooding my mind at the moment and I
see I'm taking off into space here so perhaps I should leave it at this.
Thanks to Bev Peden for an interesting, stimulating and enjoyable question.
Sincerely
Gord.
P.S. The Cause is the answer. The Community is the poorly phrased question.
- Is that rhetoric?
---
Gordon McFarlane e-mail: MCFARLANE@upanet.uleth.ca
Public Access Internet
The University of Lethbridge
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzTue Oct 17 00:52:29 1995
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 11:32:12 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: LuAnne Hightower , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Sorrowful and Grieved
Dear LuAnne,
Re:
>Robert wrote:
>>Somehow we are not to be sorrowful and grieved. Nor to focus too much on
>>the negative things of life.
Reading your letter I am persuaded that you are completely right in your
analysis of sorrow and grief. When I wrote the above sentences I was
struggling to overcome a deep sense of disturbance that I was feeling over
the issue of rape, and -- somehow -- the lines from the prayer come into my
mind. I did not write them as exact quotations. And they were not
intended as a cure-all for sorrow and grief. Rather, I used the words..in
a specific context...
It was Plato who said that the unexamined life is not worth living. What
role -- if any -- do you think cognition plays in sorrow and grief?
Love,
Robert.
From haukness@tenet.eduTue Oct 17 00:52:40 1995
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 17:37:32 -0500 (CDT)
From: John Haukness
To: Robert Johnston
Cc: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: communication
Allah-u-Abha Friends: Robert, I see the Aqdas as moving away from
permissiveness, this, if true, would affect many more behaviors than
rape. What I would ask men to join in is distancing ourselves from
bar-room type macho man thinking, innocuous statements of male
aggressveness towards women need to be stamped out because underneath a
certain element of male thought is, I beleive, the breading ground of
justification for rape. BTW I am equally appalled by the incidence of
false accusation of rape, this phenomena is something I believe the other
wing must stamp out.
haukness@tenet.edu
2015 Bay St. N.
Texas City, TX 77590
voice/fax 409-948-6074
One planet one people please!
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzTue Oct 17 00:53:29 1995
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 12:41:00 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: Gordon McFarlane , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: violence & vulnerability & questions
Dear Gordon,
You wrote:
"Excuse me if this sounds nuts." and "The Cause is the answer. The
Community is the poorly phrased question."
Cashews (roasted), Brazils (at festivals), macadamia... I sure that Eric
Pierce knows more[, and I wish he would give us a "tell-all" about SF. And
what's Burl up to? Sleeping Colean dreams, probably!]
Ohh......Gordon: I thought your letter was great!
Many years ago (1980)I went to a post-hippie gathering where Baba Ram Das
(Dr. Richard Alpert, sometime friend of LSD guru Timothy ["Turn on, tune
in, drop out"] Leary, author of "Be