![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icarusYllllgh. I hate Gilbert & Gubar.
As a former Buddhist nun I hate every millisecond of their -- oh, what's the most recent gem? -- Yeah. "Conventlike life-in-death." It reminds me that Protestantism developed as a reaction against Catholicism and thus anti-monastic distrust runs deep in our culture. Then feminism developed in reaction to Protestantism during the sexual revolution. So you've got that triple whammy of reaction against Protestantism, reaction even more strongly against Catholicism (which is worse in the feminist book), and on top of that you have sexuality as validating yourself as female (and therefore anything non-sexual as invalidating) because of the Christian history concerning chastity.
What does this have to do with Buddhist monasticism?
Nothing. There is no Eve in South Asia. There is no Eden. There's no apple. No history of "chastity" of women. (Read the kamasutra lately? There's no virgin/whore dichotomy in a culture that has no virgin.) Asceticism is largely a male space, a place of honor in that society, in which women are only grudgingly accepted. You must be bold to step into that role.
My lip curls in frustration and disgust as I begin to see why feminists in my past have been so very wrong-headed about Buddhist monasticism, how utterly ignorant, hard-headed, and unable to conceive of another culture and-- argh! I'm re-fighting old arguments in my mind now that I know what they were talking about, knowing full well that even if I had this information, they would be incapable of listening. It's not that South Asian society isn't sexist, it's just sexist in such a different way that none of this applies.
If there are any questions why I'm having trouble forcing myself to write these essays, that just answered them.
If you were wondering. Which you probably weren't. But anways....
*returns to sneering at this artefact of feminism as defined by Christianity, holding it away from me with two fingers, as if it smells bad*
As a former Buddhist nun I hate every millisecond of their -- oh, what's the most recent gem? -- Yeah. "Conventlike life-in-death." It reminds me that Protestantism developed as a reaction against Catholicism and thus anti-monastic distrust runs deep in our culture. Then feminism developed in reaction to Protestantism during the sexual revolution. So you've got that triple whammy of reaction against Protestantism, reaction even more strongly against Catholicism (which is worse in the feminist book), and on top of that you have sexuality as validating yourself as female (and therefore anything non-sexual as invalidating) because of the Christian history concerning chastity.
What does this have to do with Buddhist monasticism?
Nothing. There is no Eve in South Asia. There is no Eden. There's no apple. No history of "chastity" of women. (Read the kamasutra lately? There's no virgin/whore dichotomy in a culture that has no virgin.) Asceticism is largely a male space, a place of honor in that society, in which women are only grudgingly accepted. You must be bold to step into that role.
My lip curls in frustration and disgust as I begin to see why feminists in my past have been so very wrong-headed about Buddhist monasticism, how utterly ignorant, hard-headed, and unable to conceive of another culture and-- argh! I'm re-fighting old arguments in my mind now that I know what they were talking about, knowing full well that even if I had this information, they would be incapable of listening. It's not that South Asian society isn't sexist, it's just sexist in such a different way that none of this applies.
If there are any questions why I'm having trouble forcing myself to write these essays, that just answered them.
If you were wondering. Which you probably weren't. But anways....
*returns to sneering at this artefact of feminism as defined by Christianity, holding it away from me with two fingers, as if it smells bad*
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-03-17 06:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-03-17 06:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-03-17 06:44 am (UTC)But I think I can see why. What were these women to do? Many of them would have had nowhere else to go, and no family connections that could help them. Many would have been too old to get married even if they wanted to. It's not like women then were overwhelmed with career opportunities.
In the meantime, many of the monks would have been younger sons stuffed into the monastery to give them a profession, if it was anything like England.
no subject
Date: 2008-03-17 07:27 am (UTC)