David and Goliath and the Underdog Phenomenon

The phenomenon of the "underdog" is seen throughout the world quite often. In movies, the underdog team, or the team no one expects to win, who is too small to compete with the "big boys" and is unorganized, romantically finds their way to victory. In the classic cartoon "Tom and Jerry," the natural order of things seems to be swapped as the dominant feline is constantly thwarted by stronger, slower rodent. The Bible's David was sent to fight the giant, Goliath, by himself. He was the classic underdog, yet with strength and support, he took out the far superior soldier Goliath. In fact in many wars, small countries being threatened by a bully power, or some greater power, can produce more fight than anyone would really have expected. But why does this "underdog phenomenon" exist? It has to do with the group polarization within a small group. When a smaller group has something to lose, they innately act stronger together for defense. Let's exam the definition of group polarization, and then some examples to support my idea.

Group Polarization is defined as the tendency of people, in a group, to be more extreme in their decisions. So, if some group has a common goal, the members within it may actually act upon the group's conviction stronger than they would their own. People are willing to give a little more for the sake of the group they identify with than they are for their own, completely personal beliefs. Group Polarization always takes place in war, as the act of killing someone for a cause is never acceptable for an individual, but millions of lives may be lost in a war conflict. But their are degrees of polarization a group may see. A large group with a common interest is more likely to have difference in opinion and beliefs among the individuals than would a close-knit smaller group that all have common beliefs. Therefore, those smaller groups may be influenced by group polarization even stronger. This can aid in a war because emotion and concentration are greater

Lets take the American Revolution as our first example. The great British empire wanted the new American colonists to basically pay the British taxes because they claimed control of the Colonies. But the colonists, most of which had begun a life their with the common desire to escape the corrupt monarchy in England, would not have this. They were poor, untrained, understocked in resources, but very passionate about their convictions. Together as a group, their convictions boiled into incredible actions. They fought against the Redcoats, the armies being shipped across the world to fight people they really know nothing about for a Parliament only offering instructions. They had nothing to lose but their lives, and were not connected by any common goal. The Americans won their independence and were finally able to achieve the independence they desired by signing and adopting the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776.

Next, lets take the Vietnam war. The Vietnamese in the 1960's came from an environment of nations grabbing for their land and never having a local National Power, other than the underground Viet Mihn, a group led by a Vietnamese local fed up with the irregularity of power. In 1945 the Viet Mihn finally regained control of Vietnam after WWII and declared it the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. They had support across the small country, by nearly all of the 9 million civilians. The following year however, their power was again threatened by the French, Chinese, UN and US all at the same time. These people wanted their land. They were willing to fight for it and though they were small, they polarized into a strong, passionate force. The Vietnam War waged for more than 15 years, while the underdog, unorganized troops in Vietnam lost millions of lives and the combined total death toll of all other nations involved was less than 500,000. But despite the odds against them, the Vietnamese did not lose, the war officially ending with the capture of Saigon in 1975 by the North Vietnamese.

These examples and more illustrate the power of small, threatened groups. It is evident that having a close-knit group can be more potent than that of a large impersonal group when a common goal polarizes the groups actions. It's astounding to believe this seemingly illogical phenomenon can occur, but we must all watch out for those Underdogs.

Works Cited

"Battlefield: Vietnam." pbs.org. December 5, 2009. http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/

"Group Polarization Phenomenon." ChangingMinds.org. December 9, 2009. http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/group_polarization.htm

"Historical Events of the American Revolution." Theamericanrevolution.org. December 9, 2009. http://www.theamericanrevolution.org/hevents.asp

The Bible Killed My Future

The Bible Killed My Future

With the Dawning of the Bible and Christianity, a new role was formed for women. In biblical days and in times before the crucifixion of Christ, women were sacred and revered for their ability to bring life into the world. The feminine goddess and sacred female was once the opposite and equal counterpart to the male. Yet, after the death of Christ many religious Christian sects fought over the contents of the Bible and the direction of the church. Men attributed power with religious dominance over other religious sects and women, therefore destroying the Goddess Temple and its priestesses. This shift into anti-feminism morphed women into a gender defined role created by men and the Bible, forever suppressing them and outlining the course of the future for women.

While Jesus was alive and immediately following his death, there were many different religious sects and religious advocates trying to spread their version of the word of God. Because of these constant religious bombardments, a fluent speaker such as Christ became a crowd favorite and was soon popular among the people. His stories and his Gospel that was spread by himself and his disciples were about God encouraged people and built them up. There were both male and female disciples. One of these female disciples was Mary Magdalene. “It was unheard of for a man like Christ to defend a woman such as Mary Magdalene, who was supposed to be jaded and a harlot to boot.” (Browne 39) Mary Magdalene, later depicted as a reformed prostitute, was actually a disciple like that of Peter, Mark, Luke and Matthew to name a few. She was very close to Jesus, referred to as his “first apostle” or “apostle of apostles” (Browne 56) and might even have been his wife. “Why do most people know her as the reformed prostitute, rather than as what seems more likely-a ministering priestess with a deep understanding of the threshold of the spirit?”( Leloup xxiii)

Many men and prominent figures of the church refused to allow women to be on the same level as them. At the time of Christ, it was hard for women to find their place in the church. Women held no status in the church, only in the Goddess’s Temple. During the rule of Caesar, it was common for women to gather inside each other’s houses for a “Bona Dea” or “Good Goddess” worshipping (Bristow 50). This practice of religion was top secret and for women only. The priestesses at the temples were often revered and some life-long chaste vessels for the Great Goddess. Such matriarchal pride and worship ended after the death of Jesus. However, during the life of Jesus, the temples were still used for the Great Goddess and women, although somewhat suppressed, were still considered sacred vessels of life. Upon the “success” of the crusades and the gathering power of the church do we finally see serious controlling of women’s rights and values. “In the Middle Ages and even into the Renaissance the Catholic Church reigned supreme. With their various crusades and inquisitions, they took a hard line toward any who didn’t follow their faith. They killed literally hundreds in their various purges against the followers of Islam, paganism, and Gnosticism.” (Browne 152)

The lack of true understanding of the Bible’s words mixed with miscommunication results in many of today’s religion. “The misinterpretation of the tenth commandment that robs women of legal rights illustrates this danger.” (Bristow 21) Dividing the Bible up into two parts of slight female oppression and total submission and suppression of femininity is as easy as dividing the Bible up between the Old and New Testaments. The books in the Bible contain extremely sexist lines that put women in their place or use female liberating lines such as those from Paul and completely detract from their actual meaning. In such scriptures as that from Peter, women are really given a bad reputation and are said to merely be possessions coveted by men. “Most women in the Bible were portrayed as wily and not to be trusted. Salome and Delilah, for example were vilified. But it all started with Eve, who ‘made’ Adam eat of the tree of knowledge.” (Browne 26)

Another troubling factor of the Bible is the lack of mention of the Virgin Mary, or Christ’s mother. In other books such as Quran, Gnostic and King James Bible, Mary and other women are constantly mentioned and sometimes even featured. The lack of female presence in the Bible is just another oppressing attribute. However, in the Old Testament there is some inclusion of surprisingly strong and brave women. “We do see a few instances of strong women in the Old Testament…see exceptions like Deborah, who was a great judge; Ruth, the wife of Boaz, whose royal family produced the house of David…and Esther, who saved her people.” (Browne 27) Yet it seems that a general theme of women in the Bible is that of weaker beings, needing men to protect and shelter them. Most of the women are just depicted as whores, villains of celibate followers in the Bible.

The definition of the Latin derived word, pagan, is country dweller. We then wonder how ‘pagan’ became the term Christians used to describe heathens or non Christians. (Kinstler) One theory is that it was the country dwellers that held on to the old religion longer than city dwellers and therefore the term became used for both those who dwell in the country and those who keep the old ways close. So what were these old ways that they were so threatening to the new Christianity? It was the sacred feminine. (Kinstler) It was the idea that the female was as important as the male, to be worshiped and blessed alongside the masculine. “The God, King, Priest, and Father replaced the Goddess, Queen Priestess and Mother. The role of women became restricted.”( Robinson, html)

Why would these peaceful traditions threatening Christianity? Simply because the Church is highly patriarchal and giving the sacred female power would give the people too much power. The female form and worship revolved around sex and the worship of the body and people. The Church believed that all love and worship should revolve around God and humility. The pagan worshipers who were sexually liberating were dangerous to the new Church’s ways and therefore had to be beaten down. (Kinstler) The easiest and most accessible focal point was that of women.

Women pre-Bible were important and integral parts of religious practices and ceremonies. In forms of Pagan worship there was a Priestess who was the embodiment of the Goddess with her male counterpart as the embodiment of the God. It was however the Goddess who played the more important role. “Like the angels that have pervaded every culture, Mother God was also part of every civilization-until some religions like Christianity tried to suppress Her.” (Browne 19) Women were revered due to their ability to give life in birth and their nurturing and mothering nature. Women posts Bible were not allowed to participate actively in any of the Christian ceremonies or rites. Males were priests, bishops, popes, heads of church and the writers of the rules and divinities.

After the development of Christianity and the circulation of the Bible, women gradually shifted into this newly defined role. “An ideal wife is described in Proverbs 31 as one who not only tends to household chores but also buys real estate, manages a household staff, oversees production from a vineyard, and engages in a linen garment manufacturing enterprise on the side.” (Bristow 15) The subordinated “weaker sex” became a socially accepted norm across cultures. As Christianity spread so did this ideal feminine image. Certain beliefs from different sects made it even more possible to oppress females. Original Roman Catholics did not believe in birth control and therefore many women in this sect suffered from sometimes unwanted and constant pregnancy, then were expected to stay at home and raise all these children. “…the role of women continued to be heavily restricted by the male hierarchy of the Catholic Church, who tried to stem the flow of belief in the female principle.” (Browne 23) Despite the change in society over time, similar beliefs are still practiced in certain sects. A fair example of modern day suppression of women is the polygamist reservations and the sheltering of upcoming generations from these branches.

Mary Magdalene is depicted as the “Holy Grail” in some historical accounts and even best-selling books like The Da Vinci Code. In The Da Vinci Code, Mary is said to be the holy vessel or grail of Jesus’ lineage. Although such beliefs are not as popular as the Bible and the fundaments of Christianity, this depiction of Mary is actually commonly told in historical documents and lost Gospels. “The legend of the Holy Grail is a legend about royal blood. When Grail legend speaks of ‘the chalice that held the blood of Christ’…it speaks, in fact, of Mary Magdalene-the female womb that carried Jesus’ royal bloodline.” (Brown 327) Mary Magdalene was more than likely not a prostitute and was probably at least one of Jesus’ disciples if not his wife. In a couple of the lost Gospels, there is suggestion of Mary being well-favored over the other disciples, having more one-on-one time with Jesus, learning and understanding his teachings better than the other disciples and even jealousy of the other disciples for her. “The Gospel of Phillip: …And the companion of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene. Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, ‘why do you love her more than all of us?’” (Brown 323)

In The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown, Brown explains this dissention of Mary’s status as resulting from patriarchal church tyranny and peer jealousy. “Yet if the teacher held her worth, who are you to reject her? Surely the Teacher knew her very well, for he loved her more than us.” (Leloup 37) It is said that Peter was so hurt that Jesus favored Mary over him that he was responsible for not only slandering her reputation but also going against her beliefs and teachings and founding the “true” church of Christ in his name. “The confrontation of Mary with Peter, a scenario also found in The Gospel of Thomas, Pistis Sophia, and The Gospel of the Egyptians, reflects some of the tensions in second-century Christianity.” (Browne 54) Today, Peter is known as the rock of Catholicism and a beloved saint. Mary, is known for being a whore who tried to tempt Jesus. This development is mainly due to jealousy and the fear of woman dominance, especially Mary being more significant than Peter. “And Peter added: ‘How is it possible the teacher talked in this manner with a woman about secrets which we ourselves are ignorant? Must we change our customs, and listen to this woman? Did he really choose her, and prefer her to us?” (Leloup 37)

The early Christians leaders understood that to take away power from an societal and cultural ideal such as a religion you needed to make a mockery of their most important aspect. In the case of the old pagan religions it was the female, and so the women were regulated to sitting in the pews, raising their good Christian children, and worshiping the male God of Christianity that had no female counterpart to balance out the feminine aspect of nature. “…the female principle was gradually driven out of religion. Women were reduced to a level inferior to men.” (Robinson, html)

The Acts of Paul display a completely different ideology then thought to be coveted by Paul. In the Gnostics, Paul speaks of the beauty of women counterparts to men and how necessary both halves are. Also he would preach about the company of women for their intelligence and of fellow followers of Christ that too spoke of his teachings. “At the close of Paul’s great treaties to the Romans, he listed a number of church leaders by name, persons worthy of his praise. Twenty-six persons are mentioned, eight of whom are women…’These were noble women, hindered in no way by their sex…’” (Bristow 56)

The time period during Paul’s life was shortly after the death of Jesus and was incredibly oppressing for certain sects of women. “Paul’s Jewish converts were heirs to the authority of the Old Testament which offers quite a varied and often colorful collection of examples of womanhood. The stories within its pages depict a great diversity of personalities and powers among women…” ( Bristow 14) Women could not converse with men (including their husband) in public, worship with men, eat with men, wear certain clothing, leave their hair unbound (Bristow 88), hold a position of leadership or even obtain an education. “….women were regarded as objects, not persons, alive but inferior to men. One illustration of this lower status was the practice of women’s not eating with men. A wife would serve her husband at the table and stand while he ate.” (Bristow 19) This circumstance was largely due to off-track Christian and Jewish sects such as The Essenes (Bristow 24) which were a fanatical Jewish sect, especially with their beliefs when it came to female suppression and ruling over their wives. Women were not worth anything. Paul however spoke of female heads of churches and fellow speakers of the Gospel. A repetitively used line in Paul’s Gospel is “There is neither Jew nor Greek… neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Before the actual formation of the Bible different sects of Christianity preached their own Gospels and used the books that appealed to their beliefs the most. “You had many churches in different areas that belonged to different ‘divisions’ of Christianity, and each had its own favored Christian writings” (Browne 154) Then when the Bible came into creation, it was from one, particular religious sect and used only the books that built it up this sect eventually making it completely patriarchal. Books that spoke of a kind and loving God or that of his female counterpart were destroyed. Women Gospels were banned and a rigid set of rules were advocated and strictly followed by females. “…since coveting a man’s wife is mentioned, then a man’s wife must be his possession. The commandment, they added makes no distinction between field, animal, servant or wife.” (Bristow 19)

This book, called the Bible, although making its appearance all over the world throughout time, was repeatedly revised, depending on the political system and ruler. Another downfall of the Bible is that parts of it were actually rewritten! An example of this is The Gospel of Paul. Paul was fro-liberal feminism but his words were misinterpreted and later rewritten from constant inaccurate translations. The Bible is really just a compilation of random Gospels selected to be included in the book. Many Gospels were thrown out, destroyed or hidden because of political reasons or underhanded agendas of the church and its leaders. The Gospels of Mary Magdalene, Thomas, The Acts of Paul and of The Gnostic books were declared heretics simple because they contradicted the churches power and the desires of those who ran it. “Apparently, Jesus’ example regarding women became the norm within the apostolic church. The apostles soon began to speak of the ‘women of our company’ (Luke 24:22). When the apostles engaged in prayer, they did so ‘together with the women’ (Acts 1:14).” (Bristow 54) Churches like the apostolic church were considered blasphemous and were said to be preaching heresy.

Due to this religious shift in Christianity, women were left subordinate and even looked at negatively with the “curse” of femininity. Opposing sects were declared heretics as well and a division was made in the church. Tertullian (C.A.D. 160-230), who, after the death of Jesus, was a prominent figure and defender of the Christian faith, used the story of Adam and Eve, with Eve’s sin to condemn all women. He wrote:

“woman…do you not know that you are (each) an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil’s gateway: you are the unsealer of that (forbidden) tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God’s image in man. On account of your desert-that is, death-even the Son of God had to die.” (Bristow 28)

When Alexander the Great came into power he had somewhat of a dilemma with his kingdom. He ruled over Pagans, Christians and Jews. This caused much tension between the polytheistic and monotheistic beliefs. As a way to quell the stress he ordered certain books thrown out of the Bible, had monks rewrite or destroy Gospels he disagreed with and completely altered Christianity. With succeeding leaders such as Constantine, conditions only worsened as he tried to incorporate and somewhat blur the lines between the two religions. “Emperor Constantine wanted to put an end to that and put them all under one roof, which evolved to be the Catholic Church.” (Browne 154) The traditional holy day of Sabbath for Christians was originally on Saturday but Constantine changed that to Sunday to correspond with the Pagan Sabbath which is on Sunday for their sun god. Symbolism played a profound role with such characters of the Virgin Mary, as a “matriarchal” figure and even the symbol for the trinity. So much of the pagan religion can now be found in Christianity that is has become more of a blending of the two than anything else. However, much was lost and destroyed from this effort to incorporate these separate religions for purely political reasons. So many Gospels that spoke as much truth as those included in the Bible were lost, burned and long forgotten. Those that still clung to these beliefs were condemned. “Anyone who chose the forbidden Gospels over Constantine’s version was deemed a heretic.” (Brown 307)

The Bible has definitely had a tremendous impact on society throughout time and today. Psychologist, Sigmund Freud, developed a hypothesis over the psychological gendering of men and women and their obvious differences. Freud believed that young girls tried to compensate for their lack of penis by struggling to get ahead, surpass men, and do “manly” jobs. In the 1950’s it was very common for ambitious women to be labeled as having “penis envy” after the release of Freud’s research. (Friedan, html) Countering his theory was Karen Horney, with her reverse hypothesis that men have “womb envy” and subordinate women because they can never create life like women can. (Friedan, html) Correlating to this idea is the possibility that not only the Bible brought the onset of female subordination, but also men who feared females and their undeniable capabilities. The oppression was a reason to compensate for the lack of childbearing competence that women have. Some feminists thought that men perhaps would rather rule than be ruled since they were not needed to procreate. This theory applied to the time before men were believed to be equally imperative in reproduction [biblical days]. (Friedan, html)

With the turn of the century and the crucifixion of Jesus, mystery has continuously shrouded Christianity and past events. The Disciples and followers of Christ wrote down their interpretation of his teachings in a collaboration of stories now known as the Bible. Despite religious loyalty and testimony to this book, the truth remains that it was written by men, edited, and revised repeatedly over time by yet more men. Many books were lost in this revised edition of the Bible and whether the truth remained or was lost as well is still much debated over. “Meaning that history is always written by the winners. When two cultures clash, the loser is obliterated, and the winner writes the history books…” (Brown 335) The change in female status was just one of many negative repercussions resulting in the rise of Christianity and the blind faith put into the Bible. Religion continues to build up, oppress, define, divide, unite and dictate the lives of everyone who has ever come into contact with the Bible; whether that is direct contact such as Christianity or indirect contact: society and people pertaining to Christianity. Globalization and religious influence continues to shape the role of women today.

Works Cited

Friedan, Betty. The Sexual Solipsism of Sigmund Freud. Source: The Feminine Mystique, 1963;
Transcribed: by Andy Blunden in 1998, proofed and corrected in March 2005. http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/friedan.htm

Browne, Sylvia. Mother God, The Feminine Principle To Our Creator. Hay House Inc; Carlsbad, CA. 2004

Browne, Sylvia. The TWO MARYS, The Hidden History of the Mother and Wife of Jesus. New American Library, New York, NY. 2007

Robinson, B.A.. “Goddess Worship: That Real ‘Old Time Religion’?” www.religionstolerance.org/goddess

Leloup, Jean-Yves, The Gospel of Mary Magdalene. Inner Traditions International; Rochester, Vermont. 2002

Brown, Dan. The DaVinci Code. Random House Inc. New York, NY. 2003

Bristow, John Temple. What Paul Really Said About Women, An Apostle’s Liberating Views On Equality In Marriage, Leadership and Love. Harper Collins; San Francisco, CA. 1988

Kinstler, Clysta. The Moon Under Her Feet. Harper Collins; San Francisco, CA. 1991

Comfort Women

“Comfort Women”

Rape has no boundaries, no specific race, age, class, location or even gender. It can be used as a weapon to suppress another person, culture or nation. Throughout time the limitless usage of rape has been recounted and repeated. Even the Bible has examples of how rape was used as an instrument of war, “For I [God] will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses looted and the women raped; half the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city.” (Zechariah 14:2) The depth and degree of deterioration that rape cases a person, gender and nation is remarkable and terrible. Rape is a consistent presence that will never go away but hopefully will eventually decrease in incidence.

Sexual violence happens everywhere. There is not one place in the world that has not experienced one form of rape or another. However, rape tends to be more widespread in some areas and rarer in others. In hostile times and warring areas like Rwanda, Darfur, Bosnia and China, rape became too common and in some instances inevitable. “Women’s bodies are often used as a battleground of men’s wars.” (Peterson 43) In Serbia, paramilitary troops used rape systematically as a tactic to encourage Bosnian Muslim women to flee from their land. In Rwanda, Hutu leaders ordered their troops to rape Tutsi women as an integral part of their genocidal campaign. In Algeria, secular women were targeted by Muslim revolutionaries and forced to be sex slaves. In Indonesia, security forces reportedly raped Chinese women during a period of rioting. In Serbia, Serbian military and paramilitary units systematically raped Albanian Muslim women in Kosovo. (Enloe) It is hard to say what exactly is accomplished, other than the humiliation of women and children.

Female sexual violence during times of war often consists of targeting women’s bodies and their representation of nationalism and culture. The representation of women in this idea of nationalism is that of country. Women often symbolize the country or culture so directing crimes at them is the same as desecrating the nation itself since women are often considered men’s possessions. “But women also serve as symbolic markers of the nation and of the group’s cultural identity….The personification of nature-as-female transmutes easily to nation-as-woman, where the Motherland is a woman’s body and as such is ever in danger of violation-by ‘foreign’ males.” (Peterson 44) Often, women are viewed as objects and possessions, held and obtained by men. (Peterson 44) It is obvious that women have been targeted in nearly, if not, every war, national or cultural conflict ever engaged in throughout history. In some cases, sexual violence is even more common because of the lack of protection, education, civilization or cultural restraints. For example U.S. soldiers do not use sexual violence as frequently in times of war whereas in areas like Rwanda, it is notorious if not encouraged to tear down Tutsi unity and confidence.

There are many different forms of rape. Rape can be used to take, break, destroy, dehumanize and to torture. “Rape perpetuated by as soldiers has been experienced by women in a variety of forms:

rape by a male soldier of a woman he thinks of as a ‘foreigner’; rape by an individual male soldier of a civilian woman of the same nationality while that soldier is ‘off duty’; rape by a male soldier of a woman soldier in the same army, perhaps because he resents her presence in a preciously all-male unit or because he is angry at her for her unwillingness to date him or flirt with him; rapes of women held in military prisons by male soldiers serving as guards; rapes perpetrated by a soldier acting as an interrogator with the apparent purpose of forcing the woman victim to give information; rapes by a group of invading soldiers to force women of a different ethnicity or race to flee their home regions; rapes of captured women by soldiers of one communal or national group aimed principally at humiliating the men of an opposing group’ rapes by men of one ethnicity, race, or nationality of men from the ‘enemy’ group to make the latter feel humiliated because they have been, via rape, reduced to ‘mere women’; rapes of women by men in accordance to male officers’ system of morale-boosting rewards in their man after battle; rapes of women taking refuge in wartime refugee camps by men also taking refuge in those camps or by men who are assigned to protect women in those camps; rapes of women by those men who are prostitution procurers to ‘prepare’ them for later service in brothel organized for soldier clients; rapes of women in wartime by civilian men of their same ethnic or national community who are acting out a misogyny nurtured by and licensed by the militarized climate; rapes of women who publicly oppose militarization by men of their own supposed community who support militarization.” (Enloe 109-10)

In all of these forms of rape, they are done in an attempt to victimize and alienate these women and sometimes even men. Other forms of sexual violence consist of group rape and even horrific events of foreign objects and blades used to mutilate female genitalia. In these cases, most women suffer terrible physical deformities and lifelong medical problems that often go unaided. Men too can face terrible physical trauma. “Agger and Jensen note that ‘sexual torture’ is ‘widely used in the process of breaking down the identity of political prisoners. It is important to understand the psychodynamics of this trauma, since many refugees who seek psychological and psychiatric assistance have suffered sexual trauma.” (Carlson) The worst part is the fact that the men who commit these crimes go free and do these horrific acts of sexual violence again to yet more men and women. “Typically, when rape happens in the midst of war, no individual soldier-rapists are identified by victims, by their senior command, or by the media (if there). The women who suffer rape in wartime usually remain faceless as well.” (Enloe 108)

Women are not the sole victims of sexual violence. As depicted by Carlson, men sometimes too experience sexual violence and humiliation. “If the topic of sexual assault against women in times of war has been uncomfortably pushed to the side of the agenda, then the topic of sexual assault against men has been treated as particularly taboo.” (Carlson) Another example would be the Hutus cutting off Tutsi male genitalia in Rwanda. Men can be humiliated and physically abused just as women can. However, women seem to remain the majority of sexual victimization.

There is no grand solution that can halt sexual violence in times of war. Previously, laws have been passed and governments have debated over how to end this victimization: The 1949 Geneva Conventions, the 1977 Supplementary Protocols of the Geneva Conventions, the body of law from the Nuremberg Tribunal held at the end of World War II and the Military Tribunal of the Far East. Yet these acts and laws have offered little hope to the currently struggling victims of sexual violence. As said by Cynthia Enloe, “Rape is shocking” and not many people want to think or hear about it. However, one thing that can be done is increased awareness that rape is wrong and that it should not be tolerated. Another item to hamper future sex offenders would be to prosecute and hold them accountable for their actions “Often in Haiti and Indonesia, action has been required through the organizing by women, for women to uncover soldiers’ systematical uses of rape.” (Enloe 109). If people stand up and voice their opinions, then rape would not have to be something tolerated in any society.

Works Cited:

Peterson, V. Spike. 1988. ‘An Archeology of Domination: Historicizing Gender and

Class in Early Western State Formation’. Ph.D. Dissertation. International Relations.

The American University.

Enloe, Cynthia, 1939 “Maneuvers; The International Politics of Militarizing Women’s Lives”. University of California Press, Berkley CA.

Cognitive dissonance (Blog 4)

Cognitive dissonance is defined as a mental state where two or more contradictory ideas are held to be true. (Jasper 1) For example, people who enjoy smoking, but are also aware that smoking is unhealthy. This state is uncomfortable, and causes most people to rationalize the situation in such a way where it is acceptable for the contradiction to occur, (Jasper 1) such as when the hypothetical smoker claims smoking keeps them from stressing out, or gaining weight. This rationalization occurs all the time, and I believe that it is part of the reason that people are able to go to war so easily.

Most people believe that war, and the horrors that accompany it, are a bad thing, so why do we fight? The usual responses are freedom, self-defense, or the protection of others. These are all considered "good things," which blur the line on whether or not war is good or bad, and cause confusion as to whether or not fighting should occur. These "good reasons" are not only the cause of cognitive dissonance, they also tend to be the justification people use. After all, if we're protecting others, or freeing the oppressed, then war is appropriate, right?
Well, I have to disagree, no matter how great the prize, at the end of the day, the amount of blood spilled will outweigh it. I feel it's time for people to get their heads out of the sand, and realize that you can justify anything if you try hard enough, and doing so causes more harm than good.


Jasper, John D., Mary Prothero, and Stephen D. Christman. “I’m Not Sexist!!! Cognitive
Dissonance and the Differing Cries of Mixed- and Strong- Handers.” Personality and
Individual Differences 47.4 (2009): 268-72. Print

Lakoff, George. "Metaphor ane War, Again." AlterNet.org. 18 Mar. 2003. 28 July 2009
http://www.alertnet.org/story/15414.
-"Metaphor and War: The Metaphor System Used to Justify War in the Gulf." Presentation.
University of California at Berkeley. Berkely, California. 30 Jan. 1991. Rpt in. Viet Nam
Generation Journal and Newsletter. 28 July 2009

Multiculturalism

(Part 1: The "Inevitability" of War)-(Part 2: Racism)-(Part 3: Implict Association)-(Part 4: National Identity)-(Part 5: Multiculturalism)

In my previous blog, I had written about how a national identity that emphasizes negative differences between two groups can lead to conflict. One such criterion used to define one's national identity is stooped within racism. This racism can be either explicit or implicit - as is the case with structural violence. In addition, sheer ignorance of the manner by which a different culture functions can also lead to conflict. The multicultural movement, on the other hand, seeks to neutralize such ignorance and racism with a respectful, tolerant worldview. Even when multicultural policies are fully supported by the populace, support can erode when an overt assault on the prevailing national identity is perceived.

In essence, multiculturalism is the idea that "equality between and respect for the pluralism of cultures and group identities" will lead to less conflict (Verkuyten). While there are disagreements as to how this philosophy can be most effectively incorporated into society, the basic definition still stands. Such movements, however, are dismissed as being ineffective in the regions that could benefit most from a multicultural education. This perceived ineffectiveness is the result of the unwillingness by the majority populace to have the superiority of their culture challenged (Breugelmans). Simply put, “policies that deviate too much from [public] opinion will not be supported” (Breugelmans).

Even if a multicultural policy is initially favored by the majority populace, overt threats to the national identity can quickly erode support. Such was the case with the Netherlands which, initially, was the primary supporter of the multicultural movement after having implemented policies that encouraged immigrants to participate in the government. After several international and national incidents occured - such as the September 11th terrorist attacks, the London train bombings, and the assassination of Netherland celebrity Theo van Gogh and politician Pim Fortuyn (Breugelmans) - support quickly deteriorated. All of these attacks were instigated by radical Islamic terrorists thereby aggravating the perceived threat against the majority Netherland's national identity. Such a profound effect can be observed via a series of surveys that have addressed the multicultural attitudes of the Dutch populace between 1999 and 2007. These survey's, based off of the Multicultural Attitude Scale (MAS) examined the acceptance of multiculturalism in four domains: support for "Diversity in the Netherlands", "Acculturation by Minorities", "Majority Support for Minorities", and "Equal Rights and Interaction" (Breugelmans).For all of the domains except for "Acculturation by Minorities", results showed that on a seven-point scale, the Dutch populace was in favor of multiculturalism. The mean value of these domains resulted in a score of 3.97 out of 7 in 1999. The MAS continued to rise until the time period between 2004 and 2006 marking the Madrid bombings, the assassination of Van Gogh, and the London bombings. At this point the scale had suddenly dropped from 4.11 to 3.19. Fortunately, however, as time continued without any imminent terrorist threats, the MAS indicated that attitudes toward multiculturalism had reached a high of 4.67 in 2007.

It would appear that initial steps in favor of a multicultural climate can be credited for the swift recovery of the Netherlands on the Multicultural Attitude Scale. This recovery stands in stark contrast to the actions of America, such as the invasion of Iraq, after the September 11^th attacks where lingering racism and bigotry toward Arabs and Muslims have yet to fully subside. Perhaps the key reason as to why both nations reacted so differently lies with the self-fulfilling prophecy. Just as I have written about how the defeatist mentality that “war is inevitable” acts as a self-fulfilling prophecy, so it is with the equally destructive mentality that one’s culture or race demands more respect and acceptance then that of another culture or race.

Works Cited

Breugelmans, Seger M., Fons J.R. van de Vijver, and Saskia G.S. Schalk-Soekar. “Stability of Majority Attitudes toward Multiculturalism in the Netherlands between 1999 and 2007.” Applied Psychology: An International Review 58.4 (2009): 653-671

Verkuyten, Maykel. “Social Psychology and Multiculturalism.” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 1.1 (2007): 280-297