http://edinburghfeministnetwork.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/7/ Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:03:01 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 http://edinburghfeministnetwork.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/7/#comment-6 Deborah Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:22:07 +0000 http://edinburghfeministnetwork.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/7/#comment-6 I’m searching for the answer to a question that has irked me for years. Why is it there has never been a serious challenge to the most commonly accepted story of creation as taught by the major western religions? Why can’t someone counter with something that at least makes some sense and is in line with the way things work in this world and the way we use our language? Some think if they ignore the standard version (head in the sand approach) it will eventually go away. I have seen no sign of this happening—it stays and, if anything, becomes ever more popular. We are going to have a patriarchal society as long as the story persists that woman came out of a man rather than the way it actually always happens in this world—man coming out of woman. According to the version we have been stuck with for so long there is only man—woman is simply a part of his body so there is really only the male—the difference is an illusion. I am in agreement with the difference being an illusion; however, to make sense the story must be reversed. Man (and mankind) comes out of woman; therefore there is only woman. “He” is simply part of s”he”. The primordial, mother nature, mother earth—everything comes out of the mother. Even in scientific language the vast majority of reproduction happens with mother cells splitting into daughter cells and so on. In a story of creation that would make much more sense Adam is a woman—the first “human” mother. She gives birth to a son and raises him to be more intelligent than the other creatures that still rely mostly on instinct. Now we get to the “sticky” part—the part that explains why we have the Adam-Eve-rib story. She and her son got together, had children, formed a tribe, and so on until today. I think the Greeks knew this, hence the story of Oedipus Rex. When Oedipus realizes he slept with his own mother he gouges out his own eyes. Our story of creation is all of us collectively blinding ourselves out of fear of incest, or whatever. Perhaps it is time we got over it. What is it going to take before we clearly realize man is “the weaker one”—all out nuclear war? All of us need to work together to provide leadership that is beneficial to the overall health, especially mental health, of all mankind. The creation story we have now has one thing right—there really is only one gender. The fact we see two is only an illusion and only here on earth. To get rid of that would be throwing the baby out with the bath. Unfortunately, instead of appreciating and enjoying the illusion, we are mostly only suffering because we have all handed over the leadership and main decision-making to the weaker of the two—the one who does not have to go through the whole birthing, nurturing bit. I’m searching for the answer to a question that has irked me for
years. Why is it there has never been a serious challenge to the most
commonly accepted story of creation as taught by the major western
religions? Why can’t someone counter with something that at least
makes some sense and is in line with the way things work in this world
and the way we use our language? Some think if they ignore the standard
version (head in the sand approach) it will eventually go away. I have
seen no sign of this happening—it stays and, if anything, becomes
ever more popular.
We are going to have a patriarchal society as long as the story persists
that woman came out of a man rather than the way it actually always
happens in this world—man coming out of woman. According to the
version we have been stuck with for so long there is only man—woman
is simply a part of his body so there is really only the male—the
difference is an illusion. I am in agreement with the difference being
an illusion; however, to make sense the story must be reversed. Man (and
mankind) comes out of woman; therefore there is only woman. “He”
is simply part of s”he”. The primordial, mother nature, mother
earth—everything comes out of the mother. Even in scientific
language the vast majority of reproduction happens with mother cells
splitting into daughter cells and so on.
In a story of creation that would make much more sense Adam is a
woman—the first “human” mother. She gives birth to a son and
raises him to be more intelligent than the other creatures that still
rely mostly on instinct. Now we get to the “sticky” part—the
part that explains why we have the Adam-Eve-rib story. She and her son
got together, had children, formed a tribe, and so on until today. I
think the Greeks knew this, hence the story of Oedipus Rex. When Oedipus
realizes he slept with his own mother he gouges out his own eyes. Our
story of creation is all of us collectively blinding ourselves out of
fear of incest, or whatever. Perhaps it is time we got over it. What is
it going to take before we clearly realize man is “the weaker
one”—all out nuclear war?
All of us need to work together to provide leadership that is beneficial
to the overall health, especially mental health, of all mankind. The
creation story we have now has one thing right—there really is only
one gender. The fact we see two is only an illusion and only here on
earth. To get rid of that would be throwing the baby out with the bath.
Unfortunately, instead of appreciating and enjoying the illusion, we are
mostly only suffering because we have all handed over the leadership and
main decision-making to the weaker of the two—the one who does not
have to go through the whole birthing, nurturing bit.

]]>