Skip to main content

Why Male?

By Carl S ~

The Day after the terrorist attacks in Paris, a spokesman for Islamic Americans said that Islam is “a religion of tolerance.” These words were spoken by someone who chooses to ignore the fact that, after an Islamic extremist attack, the perpetrators shout out, “God is great!” (Where did they learn that phrase from? Oh yes, at least five times a day, every day, from the time they are children.)

The following morning, in Saudi Arabia, a blogger was flogged 50 times for degrading Islam. That same evening, Al-Jazeera America did a feature about a male singer-songwriter in Iran who was about to depart the country and had his visa revoked. “Tolerance?” In protest, several women got on the internet or Facebook or whatever, and in a group, and individually, sang one of his songs. Wonderful! Thousands of hits. But there's a problem with this: you see, in Iran, it's against the law for a woman to sing. It's based on the fear that a woman's voice will lead men into sin. This is only one law based on that belief; it seems that anything publicly feminine is forbidden to them, else why would women have to be covered in tents? This begs the question: Why aren't men in non-Islamic countries roiling in fornication and adultery at exposures to so much cleavage, bare legs, even pornography, and so much other female flesh, and so many women singers?

If there's anything to make me angry, it's prejudice against women. The source of greatest prejudice and deprivation of their rights has its origin and perpetuation through male dominated faiths. The biblical deity is a misogynist. We have writings from early Xian Church fathers speaking out on the “evil” nature of women. (Did those men resent the fact that women were necessary to make babies? I'm inclined to think so.)

Gods are supposed to be spirits, yet they are gender-based fertile for religions, which is why many of them were goddesses. This fertility explanation is the primary foundation of the Judaic/ Christian/ Islamic religions, where the god is male. As such, this god has a penis. (Wizened Sage once wrote, “Does God Have Parts?” citing bible passages in support of a yes answer.) So, this one god has a penis, or as the argument goes about religion's beginning, was a penis, and creates, seeding everything. And this is where the trouble begins for women. One reason for this is the belief of primitive peoples that the male, as made in the image of this one god, carried the entire infant in his body, and therefore, the female was only the garden plot in which his seed was planted and grew. Therefore, males rule, bitch!

It follows that the male-only baby maker superstition is the chief message of scriptural texts. Consider the virgins taken as rewards for genocide, the spoils of war. As pagans, they were considered pure planting grounds for a pure Israelite baby to come. The same applies to virgins impregnated by the “sons of God,” as described in Genesis before the Flood, and Mary, the mother of Jesus. Ignorance, total ignorance, about how babies are made. But without perpetuating ignorance, religion can't thrive.

Only half of every human organism is male, the other half is female; you can't make a baby without female chromosomes. (Although some organisms can reproduce through parthenogenesis, meaning “reproduction in which an unfertilized egg develops into a new female individual.” A case for a female god if there ever was one - males can't do that. Perhaps this Male God creation is “jealous” of a Parthenogenesis Goddess.) Monotheistic religions still insist on male superiority, in spite of the fact that their male god and all males may jack off forever and still can't make a baby without the females.

The biblical deity is a misogynist.So, now we have this one indivisible, unstoppable, out-of-control, over-testosteroned male who destroys everyone and everything that displeases him, as an example for all males, created in his image by them of course, to emulate. He okays destruction of property and lives, even demands it in his name. And, despite religion's efforts to re-brand this god as a loving father, there is no evidence that the natural world is any different than it has always been.

Christian focus on the “family values” are only paternalistic-dominated ones, in which a wife must obey her husband, not those in which a woman is the head of household. After all, it is the male, like God, who has the penis. Isn't this the same “rationalization” in Judaism and Islam?

Evidently, this jealous god, in Islamic countries alone, doesn't trust men to be self-controlled. It is why their women have to be controlled, covered up, kept quiet, lest men give in to their wiles, their Siren voices, tempting their naturally uncontrollable lusts into disobeying him. Yeah, Allah doesn't know men very well.

Perhaps the domineering monotheist “God,” created by men, is merely a projection of their own fears of sexual vulnerability to the down-to-earth sensuality of women? Astoundingly, men and even women will even kill to preserve this traditional god. Women buy into it? Surely, unknowingly, they are their own worst enemies! Are they all fearful of divine and human punishment in “letting go?” Sadly, the Almighty Penis rapes them all.

Now more than ever, we have the power to change things by changing things for women. This is why we must fully support educational and reproduction empowerment for all girls/women everywhere in the world. In doing so, we will not only bring about freedom of their human rights, but freedom for all genders to truly be themselves and express themselves ever more fully.

In every country where this male and female expression exists as rights, everyone, men, women, and children, profits without the domination of religions. Religion might not go away, but that kind of religion must fade and recede into the ignorance from which it originated. Castrate this god. Let's make it happen.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two