Sultan’s Story

God needed a sweet little kitten in Paradise. He looked down from heaven and saw Sultan, so full of love and sweetness, and decided to ask him if he would come with Him to Paradise.

“But my owner will be heart-broken if I go to live with You,” Sultan answered.

“Do not worry about your owner,” God replied, “when she knows that you have come to Paradise to be with Me, she will not be sad, for she knows that one day she will come to join you in My house. She will miss you, but she will know where you are, and she will be happy for you that you are with Me, for she will know that where you are, you are happy. She will know that you no longer feel any pain, and do not need to take pills anymore. I have heard her heart crying out to Me a thousand times to cure you of your illness so that you would no longer need to take pills, and she would no longer need to force you to.”

“I do not like taking pills, and I do not understand why I have to, but I know that if she makes me, there is a reason for it, and I still love her.”

“And that is why I need you in Paradise,” said God. “Because even though you do not understand the reason why you must experience unpleasantness, you trust and you continue to love where others might have become bitter. Your ability to love and to trust is much needed in Paradise. Your owner will understand that. This I promise you. And I promise you also that before long, you will be reunited with her in My house. This I also promise you.”

Sultan thought a bit and then asked, “Will I be able to come back to live with her if she misses me too much, or if I don’t like living in Paradise?”

“Alas no,” God replied sadly. “Once you are in Paradise, you cannot go back to the world of the living. But I also promise you that you will be happy in Paradise and that she will be happy for you. In time she will adjust to living without you around to cuddle and stroke, and the pain of your loss will fade.”

“But then she will forget me!!!” Sultan replied in alarm. “I have worked too hard to make her love me to go away and let her forget me!!”

God smiled at the little cat’s alarm.

“Do not worry little Sultan,” He said, “ she will never forget you. And she will never stop loving you. And while you may not come back to the world of the living, you will not be far from her. You see Paradise exists everywhere. It touches and surrounds the world of the living. It is only because they cannot see it that the living are not aware of it. For to see it, you need eyes of faith and a heart of love. And you need the trust of a child, or of a loving kitten. Your owner knows it is there, my sweet little Sultan. And she will know that you are still there, right beside her, even if she cannot see you with her physical eyes, for she will feel your presence with her heart. Do not worry little Sultan, she will not stop loving you.”

Sultan thought some more before asking, “Why not let her come with me? Then we would not have to be separated.”

God shook his head and said, “I still have things for her to do amongst the living, and your brother also still needs her there with him. And no, sweet Sultan, his day for Paradise has not come yet either. I need him to stay with her in the land of the living for a while longer. But you I need in Paradise today.”

“Then may I at least wait for her to come home before I leave, so that I may say good-bye?” Sultan asked God.

God shook his head again. “I am afraid that you must come now. The need for a kitten of your qualifications in Paradise is so great that it cannot be put off for even a few hours, and before you even ask, my dear little Sultan, no, there are no other kittens in the land of the living who can fill the spot in Paradise. Therefore you must come.”

“But I cannot leave her just like that,” Sultan protested.

“She will understand, my little one. And I will not leave her alone to face it. I will send someone she already knows to support and comfort her, and she will know that I have called you and that you have come with me. And he will remain with her as long as she needs him to. In fact, he will not leave her.”

Sultan thought it through thoroughly. On the one hand, he did not want to leave his owner, for he knew she needed him to love her. But on the other hand, God needed him desperately in Paradise. Then he remembered that his owner had always said that you must do what God asks of you, even if you didn’t really want to, because God had a plan and we were all part of it. What all of this meant, Sultan could not understand. He was after all only a little kitten with a heart full of love. He had never expected to find himself talking with God. But he knew that doing what God asked of him was the right thing, because his owner had said so many times. And he knew that when his owner got home and saw that he had done what God asked of him, she would be proud of him. And God had promised that they would not be separated from each other forever, after all. One day, they would all be reunited.

Sultan, the brave little cat that he was, made his decision.

He said to God, “I will die right now and come with you God, because you have need of me in Paradise.”



The Mandela Effect and How it Does Not Apply to Nazi Internment Camps

I don’t ascribe to the Mandela Effect as a way of explaining why a memory may not match up with a current reality. We all have brain farts; those moments when, through distraction or something else, the brain doesn’t process information correctly. To me, the reason so many people probably believed Mandela died in jail was simply because, while he was in jail, they heard a rumor to that effect. Maybe, they even saw something about it on the news. Their brain responded by filing Nelson Mandela under ‘deceased’, and they didn’t bother thinking of it anymore. Later on, the rumors were proven false, but their brain still kept the folder labelled ‘Mandela – Deceased’ somewhere in its depths, and failed to update it. It happens all the time. Your brain remembers that you put your keys on the table, but forgets to update that information when you pick them up and put them in your pocket.

Even though the Mandela Effect affected thousands of people, it is explicable as a simple trick of the mind. A rumor imprinting itself in your brain as an actual fact. It happens all the time. I once worked with a young woman who, when she changed departments, changed her name, too. This was done in order to avoid confusion when taking customer calls, as there was already someone in that department with the same name. Well, to make it brief, my brain split her into two people, and it was not until the day that I actually had to think of her as single person, with a specific face and name, that I realized I’d done it.

All that said, I suddenly feel like I’ve fallen down the rabbit hole and come out in a weird version of Wonderland.

You see, when I was growing up, the idea of Nazi concentration camps was widely met with skepticism. Jewish organizations were lobbying governments and international organizations in the hopes of getting someone, somewhere, to recognize the fact that these places had actually existed. Practically the whole world responded with a ‘Pffft! Bullshit!’. As far as I knew, my mother and father were the only people who actually acknowledged that there had been such places, and that was because my grandfather had actually seen one while serving on the eastern front.

No, my grandfather had not seen mile-high smokestacks belching out greasy, black smoke. What he encountered was a man in an inmate’s uniform tending the flowers around the camp. My grandfather loved flowers, so he approached the man and asked him about the ones he was taking care of. The man, without displaying any overt signs that might betray the fact that my grandfather had actually spoken to him, said very quietly, ‘Don’t talk to me. If you do, you’ll end up in here, too.’

So we knew that labor camps had existed, and that they were not places filled with happy people. That simply could not be denied, and we, a German ex-pat family, were going against the social grain in acknowledging the fact.

Then something happened. I think it was the UN recognizing the reality of labor camps in Nazi Germany that did it. Suddenly, it was all about ‘death camps’, and six million Jewish people being slaughtered. Overnight, history was rewritten. I mean that both literally and figuratively. The facts in history books were changed, so that this was now the central focus of WWII history. Books that said otherwise, books that had been written before this change, started to become hard to find. William Shirer, one of the last western reporters to remain inside the Third Reich, and to report the news from within the country, had his reputation attacked and his famous book ‘The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich’ dissed and disparaged. New ‘historians’ began to crop up who used a thousand pages trying to find solid evidence that Hitler was Antisemitic, and ending up only being able to present what the author believed Hitler must have been secretly thinking to himself as he performed various actions.

An important digression: In the three decades immediately following the war, it was widely held by historians that Hitler was not Antisemitic. The evidence supports this. When someone pointed out that his favorite cook was Jewish, he simply declared that, as of that moment, the cook was no longer Jewish. Problem solved. There were also other Jewish people on his personal staff, and half-Jews served high up in the military and SS. Historians believed that Hitler’s Antisemitism was a political tool. Too many people have conveniently forgotten that in Europe between the two world wars, Antisemitism had become quite a fashionable ideological stance. Hitler had to tap into that in order to gain and keep support. End of digression.

The point is, instead of acknowledging labor camps, an entirely new narrative was formed in/around the mid 1970s. The old understanding was simply wiped out, as if it had never been. We now had to deal with the number of six million Jews dead, as if it were an indisputable fact.

My parents now went from ‘labor camps really DID exist’, to ‘there weren’t even that many Jews in Europe when the war broke out!’

This cannot be a simple case of the Mandela Effect, where a number of people, even a very large number of people, are remembering things incorrectly. There is still too much evidence proving the change in the narrative, and too many people still alive who remember how history has been literally changed. Even if I find myself doubting my own memories at times, I find other people who remember how it was, and who are equally concerned about how the original narrative is being written over by a new one. If the new one were the correct one, an updating would be in order. But to wipe out the original narrative and make it look as if it never existed? This is something to be concerned about. In fact, we should have raised the alarm bell a long time ago.

Yes, as Winston Churchill said, ‘History is written by the victors’. But when history is being rewritten yet again, decades after the fact, and countries imprison people who dare to point it out, there is something very, very wrong. A new cult is emerging, some people say. The cult of the Holocaust. And, guess what? I hate cults. I really do. Poking around into them and going ‘tsk, tsk’ is one of my stranger hobbies. So, ladies and gentlemen, I think I have an investigation here, and it will probably end badly for me, as things have a habit of doing.


Image: // public domain

This was originally published on my other blog at steemit

The Day a Jewish Kid Played the Role of Kaiser Wilhelm – A High School Memory

The highlight of our high school’s academic year was always the elite World History class(es) ‘Who Started WWI’ debate.  The debate was a closed-door event, but we all waited breathlessly for daily updates and the final result.  It was a major event.  One could even say it was legendary.  Year after year, the World History class battled it out.

Finally, we were seniors, and it was our turn at the event.  Not everyone; just those of us who had the academic chops to be accepted into the World History class.  Some years that group was small, and there was only one class.  Other years, there could be two classes – but that was very, very rare.

When the day came to choose who would represent which country, the teacher read out the names of those students in his class whom he believed had the academic strength to lead teams into the debate.  My name was one of the ones read out.  The next step in the process was deciding who would represent which country.  I was determined to be the one who would take Germany, going into the debate.

“Germany is going to be a hard position to represent,” the teacher advised us.  He then continued, “I recommend a person like XYZ take it.”

XYZ was not me.  Still, it was not the end.  We were free to pick our countries, and I was going to defend Germany, come hell or high water.

Now we came the actual selections.  Despite the teacher’s recommendation, XYZ went the easy route, and choose Britain.  One by one, the countries were taken, and still no one picked Germany.  At last, my chance to choose came along.

“I want Germany,” I said.  The whole class broke into a sort of good-natured laughter.  I was, after all, the only student in the class who was of actual German parentage.  However, the issue still remained, was I strong enough to take a team in under the German flag?  A mini-debate broke out about it.  The teacher had recommended… but… who?… .  I parried them all.  One after another, I fielded the questions, and provided rebuttals.  At last it was over.  The matter was settled.

“If you can debate like,” said one of my classmates as they ceded the issue, “you really are the best one to represent Germany.”

I had won.  I would take Germany into the famous World History class ‘Who Started WWI’ debate.

But, there was one last country to be selected.  Russia had not yet found a champion.  There was one last captain available, and he gladly took it on.  He liked taking things nice and easy, and, well, had left his selection to fate.

The Next Hurdle

The next hurdle we faced was building our teams.  As you can imagine, some teams were easier to build than others.  When it came to building a team to represent Germany, it became almost impossible.  No one wanted to be on what was presumed would be the losing team.

‘So, who cares?’ I told myself.  ‘I will do all the work.  I just need some bodies to fill the seats beside me, and I know how to get them.’

Yes, I knew.  I would find out who had not yet been selected for one of the other teams, and offer them an enticing deal to come and join mine.  The deal?  ‘I’ll do all the work, you just have to sit there and play your role.’  So I started with the guy sitting next to me, a diminutive sort-of-once-upon-a-time-Jew.  Yes, in those days he was hard to categorize.  His mother had divorced and remarried a non-Jewish husband, and he had decided that this made him no longer Jewish.  Just like that.  From Jew to non-Jew overnight.  At that moment in time, he was identifying as a non-Jew.  His self-identification was still fluid in those days.  But… .

He wanted more.  What more could I offer?  In desperation, I told him, ‘You can take the role of Kaiser Wilhelm’.

I now had the first member of my team, courtesy of bribery.

I still needed two more people, though.  I approached another abandoned soul, another person of Jewish roots who had found herself without a ride for the debate, and added another member to the team.

There was still one spot, and I was determined to fill it.  I consulted with Kaiser Wilhelm about the individual I had in mind.  ‘Nah.  She’s just tits and ass, and no f*cking brain,’ he opined.  ‘Who cares?’ I advised, in my role as Chancellor Bismarck, ‘We just won’t let her do anything.’

The Kaiser acceded, and I recruited what I believe to be the third Jewish member of my team.

Now some of you may yelp about the fact that Chancellor Bismarck was part of the team representation.  It was a special arrangement, given the official okay by our teacher.  The lead debaters needed to assume the personas of actual historical figures, and even though Bismarck was no longer Chancellor at the end of World War 1, it was decided that he could rise once again in order to defend his nation’s honor.

The Debate

We went into battle, and it was a hard-fought one.  The other teams came at us with every accusation in the book, and we parried them all.  The use of poison gas?  Well, we weren’t the only ones.  You guys used it on us, too.  Invading Belgium?  Hey, we DID send a message asking for permission to cross before we did it.  We had the proof in the form of a copy of the wire-message that we sent.  I reached for it from the stack of documents on the desk in front of me, pulled it out, and found out I had the wrong document.  A search was quickly made for the missing message, but we could not find it!  The teacher, thankfully, interceded and acknowledged the existence of the missive.

Then came the big one.  The one that the Kaiser and I had discussed in our pre-debate meetings.  The one question we could never find a suitable answer for: Why did Germany have a military-based economy?

The Kaiser stood up.  He would field the question personally.

‘Sure Germany had a military-based economy; but that doesn’t mean it was meant for war,’ he stated boldly.

The class keeled over laughing.  They laughed until they practically peed themselves.  When they finished laughing, they’d all forgotten that we’d never answered the question.  Seizing the opportunity, we moved the debate on to the next question.  The Kaiser and I, in fact everyone on our team, patted each other on the back after class that day.  We’d survived the A-bomb of debate questions thank to the Kaiser!

The debate ended, and the judges went into seclusion in order to discuss their findings.  When they emerged, the results were read out: Britain was found to be the least responsible for starting the war.  German was the second least responsible for starting the war, and it was a close second – in fact it had been a tie, which the rules did not permit.  To declare a winner, they’d had to resort to the technicality of the missing telegram. Then, at the end of it came the country named as most responsible for starting the first world war: Russia!

The Russian team immediately stood up and bowed.  They had come in last and were damned proud of it.

It is one of my best memories of high school.  Who could forget the day when one German and three Jews cleared Germany of war-guilt!  At a high school reunion twenty years later, I found out that one person could: the Kaiser!

‘Really?  I don’t remember that,’ he said, ‘Hard to believe a Jewish kid like me would do that.’



Photo: public domain /  Bain News Service – The Library of Congress – Kaiser Wilhelm (LOC) (pd).jpg


This is something that I uploaded to my Steemit ( account today.  Since no one reads it there, I’m sharing it here.

Jesus Was a Peacenik and a Communist

Where to begin with this one?  How did it start?  Where did it start?  Why did it start? And, most importantly, why am I going there?

Well, it started with an image being tweeted out that was so awful, the mere sight of it nearly caused me to go blind, and I was not alone.  At least one other viewer had a WTF?! moment, while numerous others seemed to be experiencing their own form of visual confusion.  Words cannot do justice to the awfulness the thing we saw, so I have provided the image in question directly below (with the offender’s name blocked out).


Now that you have experienced the joy of nearly going blind yourself, you can better understand just how misguided the theme actually is.  That is, unless you are a member of the religious right.  If that is the case, you probably can’t see what is so eye-hurtingly wrong here.  I will therefore explain it to you.

Jesus was a pacifist.  He did not advocate violence, even going so far as to heal the ear of the soldier Peter had injured during the scuffle that occurred during His arrest.  Jesus instructed His followers to love their enemies and pray for those who persecuted them.  At no time did He ever tell them to go out and slaughter people who believed in other gods, or belonged to a different religious system.  Violence was abhorrent to Him.  That alone should show up the notion of ‘Deus Vult’, and ‘it’s crusade o’clock’ for what it is: garbage that has no relation to Jesus’ teachings, and something that no true believer in His message would ever adorn their Twitter account with.

There is something else that is disturbing here, though.  That is the misplaced reference to Isaiah.  Isaiah 6:8 reads: ‘Then I heard a voice of the Lord saying,”Whom shall I send?  Who will go for us?” “Here I am” I said; “send me!”  But… God never said ‘Go launch a crusade, Isaiah!’  Isaiah used words.  Fiery words, but not words of hate and division.  Isaiah was a prophet, not a warrior.  His job was to turn the people back to their God, and in so doing, keep them from being booted out of the land that He had given to them by covenant.

What Little Missy with her anime-crusade cover-photo is missing out on, is exactly what an entire segment of the religious right is also missing out on: that covenant, the Old Covenant, was rendered null and void by the Jews’ own failure to adhere to its rules and regulations.  It was replaced by a New Covenant between Jesus and His followers, which has nothing to do with the land of Israel, or the physical descendants of Abraham.  There is no ‘Holy Land’ to retake, and no crusade to wage, because the inheritance of Jesus’ followers is not an earthly one.

There are so many things wrong with the religious right that it boggles the mind.  Jesus was not a traditionalist; he did not advocate traditional roles for women.  He broke all the rules when it came to a woman’s ‘place’.  He spoke to women who were strangers to him, which was a big taboo in those days.  He fraternized with women who were considered the dregs of society, and he had women among his followers.  In the early Christian church, women acted as deacons, as organizers, and helped spread the Gospel both alone, and side by side with their husbands.  St. Paul advised women who became widowed not to remarry, and those who were not yet married to remain single, so that they could more effectively devote themselves to the work of God.

The religious right would now have all women back in the kitchen, under the authority of a husband.

That is just a taste of how far from the Gospel, and the spirit of Jesus, the right has wandered.  They’ve also thrown away the concept of salvation through faith, and returned to one of attempting to attain salvation through works (I’ve recently heard this described as ‘the Hebrew Roots Movement’, which, as a movement, is not new at all).  They’ve thrown their support behind the nation of Israel, refusing to condemn that nation when it commits heinous acts that Jesus would never have approved of.  For the love of God, Jesus talked to Samaritans, and the Samaritans ended up believing in Him!  Worst of all, the religious right pride themselves on an ideology that only people with hearts of stone could ever espouse.

What ideology is that, you ask?  One that has no sympathy for the poor, the outcast, and the unfortunate.   An ideology that spits on the poor and calls them ‘lazy’.  An ideology that believes giving to the poor only ‘enables’ them.  One that doesn’t even believe in taking care of the sick and suffering.

What would Jesus have said about that ideology?  Let’s see.  Jesus told his followers to sell everything they had, and give it to the poor.  He fed the hungry, healed the sick, and refused to condemn a woman who had been brought to him for judgement.  In the ideology of the religious right, these are the actions of a horrible, anti-American communist!  He provided FREE HEALTH CARE!  He didn’t just give out food-stamps, he GAVE AWAY FREE FOOD!  Worse yet, he GAVE OUT FREE MONEY!

By today’s standards, at least those of the crusade-fostering religious right, Jesus was a communist, a feminist, and a filthy, traitorous peacenik!  Oh, yes, he was also an antisemitic Jew-hater who believed Jews worship Satan and advocated the destruction of Israel and Jerusalem.  In the words of John 8:44 “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (NIV)

Somebody hand these religious right-wingers an easy to read copy of the New Testament, please!

A Shame of the Worst Sort

I interrupt my work on an important blog post to bring you the images below.  Can you tell the difference between the two?  The first, of course, is the now infamous image of female Swedish government representatives wearing head-scarves during a meeting with Iranian government leaders in Iran.  The second is an image of Ivanka and Melania Trump wearing hideous head-things during a meeting with the Pope in Rome.

You will note something else also: In Iran, the women are wearing clothing that fully covers the body, jackets, cardigans, and … PANTS!!!  These clothes are also functional street wear in cooler climates.  If it was autumn in Stockholm, or in Moscow, there would be very little to note about the outfits.  This is important because there is nothing bizarre in what they have been forced to put on.  A woman could still function normally in these clothes, and, in cooler weather, be completely comfortable.

Now look at the second image, the one of the Trump women.  Look at Melania, a normally beautiful woman.  What she is wearing on her head is, from my perspective, a typical mandilli – a headscarf worn by Greek widows.  Her dress is black, and hideous, and also in the style of a Greek widow.  From what I know, Italians have very similar customs the Greek one, and so I also assume that this lovely, not-yet widowed woman has been forced to dress like a widowed Italian matron.  Ivanka looks like the anti-bride, that is, a woman who has mistaken a funeral for a wedding.

Which set of women has face the greater humiliation in their respective meetings?

All right, now let us look at something else.  In Iran, women go to university, work in high technology, in the media, in medicine and science.  Iranian women coming out of Iran tend to be extremely well educated in comparison to their western counterparts.  The husbands they are married to also tend to be love matches.  I met one couple who were so into matching everythings that it was almost nauseating – and the husband was the one waiting on his wife hand and foot.

Now let us look at the conservative/alt-/far-right view of women.  I think that Ivanka/Melania photo tells it all.  Are these women dynamic?  No.  What they are is submissive, and the wet-dream of man-boys who can’t handle strong women.  The submissive conservative woman is not encouraged to pursue education and work in the sciences, medicine and media.  She must perfect her homemaker skills, have supper ready when her husband gets home, and keep the kids clean and quiet.  Most of all, she must dress herself up like the piano-tuner’s monkey image we see of Ivanka below – a fairy princess clad in black so the other men don’t get too turned on, while a more mature woman needs to dress like a the shriveled prune illustrated by Melania.

Do you understand why the far-left is more open to Islam than it is to western conservatism when it comes to women’s rights?  They see women in progressive Islamic cultures becoming doctors and researchers, being fully utilized a thinking human beings, and then they look at man-boys in the west who advocate keeping women at home cooking and cleaning.  The truth is, western women know exactly what conservative/alt-/far-right male-dominance culture is all about, while they only see a smattering of images depicting Islamic male-dominated culture.

The fact is, both are odious and dangerous to women, and it is utter stupidity to run from one into the arms of the other.  The two images below should serve as a warning that western conservatism is no different under the skin than hard-line Islam is.  Take another look at what western conservatism has done to the beautiful Melania, and realize that this is what it has in store for all women who are stupid enough to run to it for cover.

Also, watch the video in the following link, if you can stomach it.  It will show you how women who have already been brainwashed into believing in right-wing values think.

Laura Doyle – The Surrendered Wife: Stop Nagging & Controlling, Be Feminine

Swedish Women in Iran:


The Beautiful Melania, Humiliated


Personal Theology – A Woman’s Place?

A Woman’s Place?

I will start straight off by telling you that I have never considered myself a feminist.  In fact, I have never particularly liked feminists.  When I was growing up, Gloria Steinem was at her zenith, preaching a largely man-hating doctrine.  As a tom-boy, I did not appreciate men being bashed.  I hung out with boys, and found them a hell of a lot more interesting and fun to be with than the stupid girls I went to school with.  Girls played with dolls, wore silly dresses and uncomfortable shoes, and were fascinated with makeup and hairstyles.  I did not have time for that nonsense, and certainly thought that their tendency to cry every time they skinned their knees was… well, it was just plain girlish.  I was trained by my brother to take things like a boy, and that meant not crying over minor injuries, not wearing dresses, and definitely not wasting my time grooming and being groomed by other females.

So, in a nutshell, I was trained by my older brother to behave and think like a boy.  This did not change the fact that I was a girl, that I had girl-type interests and tendencies; it only changed the way in which I choose to view my role, and my limitations, as a girl.  My brother taught me how to fight.  He taught me so well that I no longer fight because I go into the state that the Vikings used to call ‘berserk’, and it is terrifying to behold.  I won’t stop beating the crap out of my opponent, or getting the crap beaten out of myself, until one of us is pounded into the ground to the extent that they cannot get up again, or even move a single digit of a single finger.

All of that is to say that, in my opinion, a woman is a wimpy, simpering thing only because she is trained by her family and her society to be that way.  Instead of mental and physical toughness, women are taught to be manipulative.  To some degree this is not their fault, but to a greater degree it is.  It is easier for a woman to find her way in life if she plays the delicate little flower who needs a man’s help to carry her groceries home.  She also knows that men like nothing more than to have their egos stroked.  So she plays the damsel in distress, and her target gets to play Sir Galahad.  Women are conniving, and men eat it up because they have fragile egos, largely due to the fact that they know in their heart-of-hearts that they are most definitely not the men their ancestors were.

The roles of men and women in history

Modern men, particularly those on the political and social right, have a romanticized notion of what the historical and biblical roles of men and women were.  I can only assume that they get these strange ideas from watching 1950s television shows.  The 1950s, by the way, are not considered ancient history.  The 1950s were, however, a nasty and regressive time in male – female relations.  The reason so many feminists hate the 1950s is because it was the era when Rosie the Riveter was stripped of her job as welder in an airplane factory, and forced back into the house.  During WWII women had proved themselves in a wide variety of ways.  They had gained self-respect and a sense of independence.  Then the men-folk came back home, and Rosie was forced to play the role of the modern housewife.  That is, she was told to be dependent on her husband for money, food and shelter, and, above all, to behave in a manner that he would consider non-threatening to his fragile masculinity.  Rosie cooked, cleaned, popped out children on a regular basis, and provided sex on demand.  Her husband expected her to keep her weight at an acceptable level, to primp and groom herself to his liking, and to fetch his slippers on demand.

Rosie had never been so humiliated!  Never had womankind been treated as such unequal partners!

Did I say ‘never had womankind been treated as such unequal partners’? Well, hadn’t it always been that way?  Wasn’t it always so?  Doesn’t the bible state that a woman’s place is in the home?  Wasn’t Eve created for this very reason?

No.  Absolutely not.  What I am about to say requires a certain degree of intelligence that I fear many people lack, as well as an ability to perceive subtleties along the lines of the difference between a brick and a rock.  A brick is one thing, and a rock is another.  They are similar, but not the same.

All right.  Let us start with Adam and Eve.  Eve was created as a helpmate for Adam, and a companion.  Adam and Eve did not have a kitchen.  Eve was not confined to the kitchen.  She helped Adam tend the garden.  They worked together, and kept each other company.  There is no record of how they split their roles when they had kids.  One can assume that they shared the job of child-rearing.  However, the fact remains that there is no record of how they split it up.  For those too dense to get it: there is no proof that Eve was the first housewife, just as there is no proof that she was the first feminist.  Period.

Now, let us move a little further down in history.  Men and women eventually settled down into family units and households where the men went out and did the heavy work, while the women stayed home and cooked and cleaned.  Wrong.  Look at a farm family: when there is work to do, all members of the family pitch in to do it.  Women milk cows, help plant and help harvest.  They slaughter animals, too.  As soon as the kids are old enough, they are given jobs to do, too.  Everyone pitches in to the best of their ability, talent and strength.

The same holds true when home-industries start up.  Women contribute to the business in some form or another.  A miller’s wife did not remain in the kitchen.  She helped her husband grind the grain, bag the flour, and deal with the customers.  The success of the business was as much her concern, as it was her husband’s.

That is the historical reality of a woman’s role in the family.  The family was a business, and she was a worker in that business.

That is not the same as what befell poor Rosie the Riveter.  Rosie became a victim of the changing times.  The 1950s brought with it a major change in womens’ roles in the family, and not one for the better.  During the two world wars women had contributed greatly to the war effort.  They were moving forward as radio operators, and front-line nurses, they worked in intelligence and went behind enemy lines as spies.  They flew airplanes from base to base, and in Germany, Hanna Reitsch became a legendary aviatrix.  Then, suddenly, the menfolk decided that women should cook, clean, and had over the control of the family finances to men.  Rosie, who a century earlier would have taken payment from people coming to the mill, or the haberdasher, or other home-enterprise, was suddenly given a weekly allowance for groceries, and worse yet, had to ask her husband for permission to buy a new dress.  She wasn’t even allowed to pay the utilities.  Her husband kept the cheque book locked in a drawer in his den.

All of this is to point out how unnatural a woman’s role had become.  It is no wonder that backlash in the form of feminism would soon occur, or that women were so angry at men.

The right or the wrong of what happened next is not the point I want to make here.  What I want people to understand is that the housewife of the 1950s is an anomaly in the history of the human family – at least in the west.  The problem is that it has become enshrined as the role God has assigned to women by men (and other women) on the political and religious right, and this is dangerous in our day and age.

The role of women as viewed by the political/religious right vs. Islam

I am not going to get into the whole lunatic-left ideology of feminism, because, quite frankly, that rubbish is simply a case of ‘we have a common enemy, therefore we are friends (for now at least – after the revolution, we’ll dump you)’.  What I find very concerning for sensible modern women is how the political/religious right wants to impose the 1950s on women all over again.  This is utter stupidity, and I have to say, it is the result of men who are basically losers being frightened of real women.  Think about it: how different is their view of women in society from that of the radical Islamists they purport to be fighting?

Not very.

In radical Islam, a woman remains in the house at all times.  She cannot leave, unless escorted by a male relative.  The husband is even responsible for the household shopping.  When she does set foot outside the door, she must be clothed correctly, lest she bring shame on her husband and her sons.

The political/religious right believe the same thing: a woman’s place is in the home.  The man controls the finances. He decides on all purchases, and she requires his approval to spend money beyond her pocket-allowance.  When she steps out of the house, she must wear makeup and heels and generally maintain her appearance so that she does not embarrass her husband by looking too fat, too plain, too unkempt.  And, even though she can go out on her own, it is only to hen-parties.  Having coffee with a male friend is really not acceptable.

Islam: a woman must provide her husband with sex on demand.

Political/religious right: a woman must provide her husband with sex when he’s horny.  This includes doing it on the living room sofa during televised ballgames.

Islam: a woman has no right to vote.

Political/religious right: women voting fucks things up.

Oh, and here comes the big one… .

Islam: an unmarried woman is a disgrace to her family.  Women must marry and produce offspring.  It is the will of Allah.

Political/religious right: an unmarried woman is a thing of horror.  Women were created for one reason, and one reason only – to produce offspring.  That is what God made them for.

Well, no.  The political/religious right has been ignoring important parts of scripture, and applying only those parts that support its agenda.  Well, in Luke 20, and in Matthew 22, Jesus says something quite different.  In fact, it is based on these scriptures that the monastic life got its start.  Jesus clearly says that the children of this age (his own) marry and are given in marriage, but that in the age to come, they will neither marry, nor be given in marriage, because they will be like the angels (paraphrased).  So, marriage, as we know it, is not God’s will for humans.  It is an aberration resulting from a fallen state.  Humans, and that includes women, who chose not to marry are not acting against God’s will.  We are acting as He made us, and if you believe in Jesus, then you also believe that all the old rules and traditions are no more.  The only rules a true believer must follow are those set out by Jesus himself – and Jesus said marriage would one day be no more.

That is a brief synopsis of a complicated situation.  So now, to the bones of the dilemma.  The left is aligning itself with a foreign religion that is oppressive to women, much in the same way that all the parties opposed to the rule of the Shah in Iran aligned themselves with an Islamic group in order to overturn the existing state of things.  But, in Iran (this comes from someone I once knew who was involved in that revolution), those same groups were sucker-punched by the Islamists and denied their part of the pie.  Bit by bit they were driven out, imprisoned, executed and exiled.  That is the fate that awaits the radical left in the west.  They haven’t learned their history.

The right claims to be opposed to this foreign religion, but we have seen some lackluster opposition to it.  Why would the Austrian president be so la-dee-dah about the fact that women will probably one day have to go under the veil in Europe? (FYI: I am not saying he is right-wing – I am simply using his behaviour as an example.) Well… maybe because, on some level, this is what men who are not like the men of old really want.  The idea of dominating women is appealing to weak men, particularly men on the political/religious right.  As disgusting as it seems, women are actually better off with the ‘feminist’ men of the left, men who are terrified of playing the man, than they are with these fake ‘macho’ men of the right, who have history and religion all wrong.  This is not good for those women who are not the conniving, manipulative type, though.  We – normal, natural women – are now caught between several forces who want to strip us of our person-hood.  If Islam wins, we are screwed.  If the right wins, we are screwed.  If the left wins, with their men-can-have-vaginas nonsense, we are really screwed.

All I can say is ‘God help us all’, because nobody else seems to have the sense or the balls to do it.

The Travelling Storyteller

This is a little story that I created in order to illustrate a point.  I’m putting it up here for the fun of it.

It’s a few thousand years back in time, somewhere in the land that we now known of as the Middle East.  It is after sunset, and a group of people are huddled around a campfire.  The evening meal has long since been eaten; now it is the time for the telling of stories and exchange of the day’s events.  Tonight, however, is a special night for the members of the this nomadic tribe.  Tonight they have a visitor has come to join them, a wandering story-teller bringing news of other tribes in other lands.  For some of the women, the daughters of relatives scattered amongst those distant clans, it is an opportunity to receive news of home.  Kept separate from the knot of men by the fire by tribal tradition, they strain their ears from behind tent walls, eager to catch whatever news and stories the traveler will relate.

The traveler, what we would call a minstrel in the West, knows that a large part of his job is to keep his listeners entertained.  To do this, he will mingle fact with fiction, create a story out of mundane reality.  He will then adapt the story to suit the tastes of each individual audience, changing heroes into villains and vice versa, depending on who he’s telling it to.  He has to be careful not to upset the sensibilities of the tribal elders, or say anything that might be considered as undermining the authority of the local kings.  It is, in fact, part of his job to weave into his stories whatever legends or lineages the local kings or leaders want to propagate about themselves.  Some want their exploits elevated to the level of legend, and their foes turned into mythical beasts; others want to reinforce their authority through claims of godhood, or at least descent from the god of their choosing.  He obliges by dutifully crafting stories where these same kings or their ancestors are depicted as being the sons of gods, and real-life battles are recast as wars waged against superhuman opponents.  Of course, good, as represented by the king, the elders, or the ancestors, always triumphs over the evil of its adversaries.

He has decided that tonight he will regale his listeners with a story set to the backdrop of an ancient legend that he learned about during his travels to the east.  Since his audience is a wandering tribe of semetic shepherds, he will need to tailor it to suit their own unique history and peculiar religious beliefs.  All mention of those eastern gods will need to be purged though, and replaced with these people’s god.  That’s always very important, getting the gods right, particularly in these distant regions where foreign gods are often demonized.       He’ll also need to make the central character one of their patriarchs.  That part is easy.  If he doesn’t know of one, or can’t think of a suitable historical figure, he will just create one and give him a back-ground suitable to a legendary patriarch.  If he’s convincing enough, and he usually is, these people here tonight might even believe the yarn is about to spin.

He takes a sip from the pounded silver cup at his side, hiding his smile behind it.  These people are aliens, foreigners, in someone else’s land.  They are small in numbers, but have a strong belief in their own ways and customs.  One could say that they had a sense of historic destiny.  And, while they are not antagonistic towards the gods of the people around them – that will surely come with time, though; it always does –  the god that they worship is different from that of the people around them.  A story about an outsider desperately trying to get people to listen to his warnings about impending disaster, and having those warnings fall on deaf ears because he is an outsider, will certainly resonate with them.

He lowers the cup, placing it on the ground by his side where he can easily reach it whenever his mouth becomes dry, and clears his throat in the universal signal that the story is about to begin.
“This is a story about your ancestor Noah, a man called by God to warn the people around him about a disaster that was about to strike this land and about the people refused to listen to his message…”   So began his story, a story that unknown to him, would be passed down from generation to generation over thousands of years, believed and loved by a people who took it for the historical truth.  This mysterious stranger, this wandering storyteller, was without a doubt, the best of not only his generation, but of many generations to come. Strange, and somewhat sad, that nobody ever asked him his name…