[HANASHIR:1750] Re: Politically Incorrect

[Rick Lupert <Rick...>]

Joel,

Thank you...you said in a much clearer and knowledgeable way what I was
attempting to say in my earlier comments on why we need to change our
language.  It seems to me if it's already difficult for K and 1st graders
to hear God using anything but male pronouns, then WE still have a lot of
work to do to make it not such a challenge for future K and 1st graders.

Rick

>And well we should.
>
>There are communities and individuals that are working on the project of
>making
>Jewish *Hebrew* liturgy more gender-inclusive and/or gender neutral.  It's a
>much larger project than doing it in English.  Part of it is the grammatical
>constraints of Hebrew, since most parts of speech are gendered.  To make it
>more difficult, rhyming and scanning of text gets altered when gender gets
>altered.
>
>Neither English nor Hebrew have good gender-neutral language that also conveys
>a *personal* connotation.  (I can't bring myself to refer to God as "It",
>although I have little problem referring to Her as "She.")
>
>It's amazing how locked we are into male language, the while giving lip
>service
>to the idea that God isn't a boy, or a man, or indeed has any gender at
>all.  I
>work with young children at the synagogue where I teach.  When talking about
>God I very casually use feminine pronouns, not making any big deal about it,
>but rather just throwing them in the same way one would throw in masculine
>pronouns.  Almost without fail somebody -- and these are kindergarteners and
>first-graders -- will catch it and loudly ask "SHE?!!!"  This provides a good
>opening for talking about what the students believe about God and gender.
>Using the feminine pronoun at least gets them thinking, in ways they haven't
>before.
>
>So, I object to a mindless use of masculine pronouns, without considering the
>effect on the psyche of doing so.  I object to (IMHO) the cop out of saying
>that "Oh, well, it's just because that's the "general" pronoun."  That's true
>as far as it goes, but I believe the reasons the male is "general" is
>rooted in
>(dare I say it without being labeled PC?) male supremacy.
>
>FWIW, I also object to the term "politically correct" to describe projects
>such
>as these, and the people who participate in them.  It's become convenient and
>common to use it, but the term has frequently been used to bash those who
>strive to change our consciousness in our use of language.  It's become a term
>of ridicule and mockery.
>
>At least in the context of education, Atlantic Monthly called it "a
>threatening
>wall of fire sweeping through American higher education."  (March 1991, p.
>51.)
>Newsweek wondered if it is "the new enlightenment on campus or the new
>McCarthyism?"  (24 December 1990, p. 48.) It's come to mean those campus
>thought police, those New McCarthyists who are out to kill all speech and
>debate, toss the Western Canon, and generally destroy standards, if not
>civilization as a whole, replacing it with multiculturalism, touchy-feely
>women's studies and ethnic studies courses, cultural relativism, subjectivism,
>and assorted similar "evils."  Examples of this line of thinking are Allan
>Bloom's Closing of the American Mind (1987), Dinesh D'Souza's Illiberal
>Education (1991), Charles Sykes?s Profscam (1988), and Roger Kimball?s Tenured
>Radicals (1990), as well as an assortment of magazine articles, including the
>two I cited above.
>
>I don't find attempts to make the Hebrew liturgy gender inclusive to be PC at
>all.  I find it, in fact, the only way that I can practice a serious Jewish
>spirituality without constantly being interrupted by the male-ness of it all.
>(Understanding Hebrew can be a curse as well as a blessing.)
>
>If you don't think that male God-imagery is problematic, consider that Torah
>teaches that humans are (excuse me, "Man is") created in the image of God.  If
>that image is constantly cast in masculine terms (as my kindergarteners and
>first graders graphically illustrate), which 47% of the world's population
>carries God's image, and which 53% does not?  Is there not an irony to
>B'reishit 1:27 "Va-yivra Elohim et ha-adam b'tzalmo b'tzelem Elohim bara ot
>zachar un'kevah bara otam" ("And God created man in His image, in the image of
>God He created them, *male and female* *He* created them")?
>
>
>Joel


Lupert: It's The Website - @ - Poetry Super Highway
http://PoetrySuperHighway.com/