If we worshipped a woman, would we be living in a patriarchal society? And who decided that one nation under god meant someone with a c***?
I’m talking about the capital G, when I say worship. The undefeated reigning champ, keeper of people’s devoted faithfulness, capital G; and I’m going to use a lot of question marks in the process. I didn’t stutter. Let’s get into it.
—
Is the patriarchy we live under the chicken or the egg in the path of worship that’s culminated for roughly 2,000 years? Is the reason our society is centered around men because we’re told to worship a man? Yes, I think so.
If things were written differently, as in, if god is and has always been a woman, would the people who hold positions of power today be sitting under the comforting light shining down from a matriarchy? While those left unrepresented feel a slight disconnect or a yearning to be seen? As in, would men be the ones constantly thrown off the American ladder to success?
Is it a coincidence that under our patriarchy, the figures people primarily worship are male? And that the gender identity of celebrated fictional characters extends to the male identity like superheroes, Santa Claus, and even Mickey Mouse; and these males are coupled with a woman who is nothing more than the supporting role? Are there women that our society worships? Or are we just objectified? What distinguishes spiritual worship from secular?
Can those who are conditioned to a specific perspective of worship develop the capacity to conclude for themselves who and what they choose to worship? If someone is thanking capital H him for all of their blessings, are they assuming, by association, blessings here on earth can only come from those with lowercase h him?
—
Allow me to throw in a mini disclaimer before I continue, because my intent as my argument unravels is not to bash on the entire sociological construct of men. I know there are many good men out there who try to do the right thing, put themselves in other people’s shoes, and understand the privilege behind their positionality in our society. Those men are in the minority, and they further may be the only of their kind to make it past the first paragraph of this post.
Let’s bring in some biblical and factual history for some story-telling ornamentation.
If those who did the writing came before the story itself, who’s to say the story holds water, and what does it take for an army of people to baptize themselves in it? The story being the Bible, and the water being the sacrosanct manner in which it enacts its contents into society.
If the start of time, according to the biblical timeline that is spoon-fed to us and serves as our reference point, was decided as the works of a woman, what would our world look like now? Or did patriarchy settle into its position before the concept of god itself was decided, and those who wrote the book let it unfold in the way that suited them best?
Honestly, backing up a little, why do we use AD and BC when we could just use one timeline? I respect the historians who are embracing revised year notations, but what does a girl have to do to get some relativity of my existence to the Big Bang? Perhaps a revised year notation according to the start of our universe and the development of the space and time continuum, rather than the start of the men we’re continuously told to work our calendars, not to mention lives, around. I get that the introduction of time’s interconnectedness with the universe complicates delicate things like timelines. However, when it comes to problem-solving, would you rather consult literally any man ever or the Universe for advice? That’s what I thought.
The boys who wrote the book were clearly dead set on the main characters of their new story mirroring theirs and only their reflection. Correct me if I’m wrong, but did they save at least one seat for the rest of humanity at their lunch table? If there’s room for a father, a son, AND a holy spirit, I think there’s room for an aunt or a sister, or a girl best friend, too.
I’ll admit, I don’t think Mary was a virgin, but I DO, however, believe she deserves a little more credit and definitely an invite to the lunch table. Have men always been so entitled to the labor women endure to reproduce our population? I mean, if you want a gumball out of a gumball machine, you have to at least put in a quarter, but if you want a baby out of a woman??? In this case, a baby that a entire generations ended up worshipping? Nothing. Instead, they actually made MARY pay up a sacrifice to HER OWN kid, out of respect to him, of course. I get that he was a special kid, but I mean, come on. Make it make sense. And someone please give Mary her god damn quarter, with interest.
—
Ever since waking up to the realization of my ever-developing conditioning to the patriarchy, I’ve been questioning many things that pass through my awareness.
If one is at a crossroads in their personal beliefs, are they able to choose their own god? Or are the only god options the ones other people discover for us? See the options and take a pick of the litter, type beat. What makes other people more qualified than me to discover the god of my universe? Further, the determinant of how I’ll spend the rest of my eternity after my time on Earth… leaving that up to a man? I don’t think so.
Religion could be viewed as nonbinding, but it isn’t really, is it? If you find yourself to be religion-curious, at a crossroads for which religion you want to follow, you’re empowered by an illusion of choice. But that’s all it is, an illusion. Your decision is assimilated to: which of these men do I feel like suits me best right now, where I’m at in life right now, and do I see myself in their sea of devoted followers? Am I wrong? The pick of the litter is men, unless you’re going down Mount Olympus road, and that’s a whole other conversation.
—
Though at this point it may seem like it, my intention is not to stir people’s feathers. Rather, I’m hoping to invoke a new frequency of thought. One does not need to be an expert on theology to use a critical thinking lens on the dominant position religion has taken in society, one you likely live in, and the harm it continues to feed, solely because we are all in its crossfire, and therefore are entitled to using our perspective as currency for conversation. I’m assuming less of the role of a theologian, if that wasn’t obvious, and more a questioner of existence, using question marks as my currency, as promised.
We all have our opinions on religion, whether it’s the concept as a whole or the traits that vary from faith to faith.
If you’re religious, and it makes you happier and a better person, that is awesome! I am glad. I do find elements of religion to be cool. I also worship things in my world, and I’ve found a similar happiness result. I’m not asking anyone to make a radical change, just to take a step into a different perspective. You can take a couple of steps to the left and still stay under the same roof. However, regardless of whether your practice of religion contributes to positivity in your own life, organized religion’s influence on greater society is, arguably, destructive. The evidence is right in front of us, and that is where the focal point of this discussion belongs.
Would anything in our society change if we collectively and unitedly were to change that capital H him to a Her? Our national anthem preaches “One nation under God.” If everyone’s default god were a woman, would that trigger the cascade in our food chain that we’ve so desperately needed? Would the ripple come with a force mighty enough to shatter the glass ceiling sitting in its path? Would there be a woman in the White House by now?
I’m not claiming a matriarchy to be the solution and reparer of harm caused by this patriarchy. More so, that decisions made in the mind of a woman would be the first step in the right direction, for the first time maybe ever. Knowing what it feels like to be on the other end of a monocultural system of power, I would not wish the same upon the men of the world, likely shaking in their boots at the mere suggestion of a woman calling the shots. Why are some men so afraid of a woman in her power? Does this fear tighten the grip they hold on their precious patriarchy, squeezing it so tight until it explodes as the hate they project onto the world?
I’m not to say men don’t have worthy things to say, but what would the narrative look like if women’s voices were the ones leading the gospel? Would it be a language we are even capable of communicating in at this point in our submissive conditioning? Are women asleep until we wake up to our power?
Is there greater chance of achieving an equitable society under Him, or the untapped Her? Haven’t the hims had enough time to get there? I think patriarchy has proven that equity is neither a priority nor a goal.
Do we know for sure that an equitable society is unachievable? Just because it hasn’t happened yet? Is it a question of human nature or the mind of the people calling the shots?
Maybe I’ve got it all wrong, and someone without gender association would serve our society best. In our modern day, what direction does this conversation go? The dialogue does, however, begin with dismantling the source of the current pattern of power. I’m tired of seeing all kinds of men in all kinds of places screwing all kinds of things up; and I’m tired of holding a god damn broom.
—
My primary intention is for my words to tap into the consciousness of your thoughts. If you’ve gotten to this point, I hope I’ve kindled a fire within you. This is just the beginning.
So, is our society capable of worshipping a woman? Or are women built to do the worshipping?
Xx
Emma
