I guess it had to do something with my post about Bob Guccioné on my web site at shhhhdigital.com (right here as luck would have it).
My guess is that there's a lot of people who see what Mr. Guccioné did as being exploitive of Women or outright wrong. I spent most of the day being abused by a segment of my community who conducted their abuse just outside of my apartment building and from some of the neighbouring apartments to my own as well. Perhaps they deserve a B+ for originality this time though this routine is quickly getting old. I mean I don't regard hate as meaning love (or blood for that matter) as I'm not a member of any ideology that would operate in such a way.
There are no ulterior motives to my writing the article which had actually started out as a tribute to fellow writer Terry Runté. I am not one for chasing droves of Women (its been 8 years and 4 months since my last physical and sexual relationship), and I tend not to objectify Women purely as sex objects though I do enjoy sexuality quite a bit being a Scorpio. In addition, my love interest is Mandarin Chinese. She is very beautiful and insanely funny as well as being a bit older than myself. A respectable age difference is not a big thing to me. Regardless here's my retorte to my harassers and anyone else that I offended with that article who sought other means to attack me.
First of all as I've said many times, I'm not Italian or Sicilian myself any more than I'm Australian, African or Jamaican. In saying so I intend no offense anymore than I'd be offended by someone declaring their ethnicity or country of origin as being different from mine. The point in a multicultural and multilateral world isn't that we have to give up our concept of geographical or cultural identity. It is that we have to accept and embrace everyone else's. In the same token as being a Man, I do not give up my own identity as such except occasionally in an attempt to understand the opposite sex a little better. Instead I accept and embrace Women. So I am very proud to be a Canadian Man, in a country made up of many cultures but ultimately I am myself rather than having someone else's identity thrust upon me. Oh, and I am perfectly alive.
I do admire what people like Mr. Guccioné and Hugh Hefner accomplished in terms of putting Women in charge of their bodies during a time when Women's rights still had a long way to go. Ultimately that was an uphill battle for them against the mores of society and the clergy of the time quite honestly. This isn't about getting a chance to peep at a Woman's privates and standing up for that right just in case of being rewarded with freebies or anything of that nature. Not being a member of Prince Hall myself, I do respect Rev. Jesse Jackson for allowing himself to be interviewed by Penthouse despite the fact that he'd taken a hard stance against both Penthouse and Playboy Magazine at the time.
What's The Case?
It's about a Woman being in charge of her own body and having the final say on whom she shares that aspect of her being with and under what terms and circumstances. That's a say that hasn't long existed for married Women as they were considered up until fairly recently the property of their husbands. The unwed Women would be the property of their respective families and most likely the Man of the house. In terms of the Women being the property of their husband this was referred to as coverture. This meant that a married Woman and her belongings were the property of her husband. There were variations on this concept though most of them pretty much adhering to the idea that a married Woman was the property of her husband.
Despite the fact that there is evidence to suggest that coverture was not as extreme as it may sound, it took a long time for a married Woman's rights to be reflected in written law. The practice started in the courts of the late Middle Ages in England and its abolition began around 1839 with the Married Women's Property Acts. Coverture was alleged used in court cases, both for and against Women up until 1972 in the United States. In Canada the situation was similarly changed under the Matrimonial Property Acts (see Woman And Property) which was passed in most provinces around the 1970s.
Marriage for most being a religious institution tends to regard Women as the property of Men as the scripture from whence Biblical passages are translated were written between 1500 to 2000 years ago were drawn up mostly from patriarchal societies. Essentially a time when Women in many parts of the world were subjugated and considered property of their family or community. So the original material from which the Ceremony and Sacrament of Marriage is drawn has a wide variety of origins and has changed a little in the twentieth century.
For instance, it was voted on September 12, 1922 by the Episcopal Church that the Woman's vow: "to love, cherish and obey" her husband should be changed to: "to love and to cherish". My research did not lead to any smoking gun that found the clergy guilty of the systematic mistreatment of Women with regard to Marriage, though there is much evidence that indicates that the subjugation and oppression of Women is a communal phenomenon often fuelled by a shared ideology. That would certainly be the case in Witch Trials in both Europe and Salem Massachusetts in which 75% to 85% of the accused were Women.
Many modern religions still regard and treat married Women as being the property of their husband, especially under patriarchal religions though this has and will likely continue to change under the pressure of Women's rights advocacy and activism. Television shows such as Escaping Polygamy (which details the efforts of Women seeking to escape the clutches of the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints) outline such ideologies boldly, while other equally oppressive ideologies seem to operate unscathed in terms of scrutiny against them. This would certainly be the case with the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Catholic Church (patriarchal religions with all male ruling committees). This is not about religion bashing as much as it is shoring up rights in some places where these issues should be applied. Once again, I have no ulterior motive in that regard despite the fact that I'm Buddhist and Taoist, though I am not a devout, I do take my beliefs seriously. We all have a right to our beliefs or the absence thereof where the application of those beliefs does not deny the rights of another person.
Bifurcation, Confidence And Education?
There are many feminists that would likely have my hyde for arguing Women's Rights using the history of Penthouse and Playboy Magazine as my itinerary. The rationale in doing so has more to do with unifying rather than separating Women according to vocation and level of Education. Two aspects that have long been used to divide Women, as Women have long been victims of the bifurcation that often divides us all. Shameless categorization of Women as different brands or flavours, according to hair colour, height, eye colour, chest size, hip size, young or old, eye wear, employed or not, educated or not, make-up or natural etc.
So to divide Women who've empowered themselves on two different grounds is counterproductive to how all Women should be treated throughout society. One group on the basis of their education and application of expertise and skills and another by taking charge of the power of their own body and sexuality but not necessarily giving all of it away. Exploitation in either case would be to take what either of these groups of Women have to offer without their fair and just due or even consent. In either case, their education, self confidence and having full control over their body and their sexuality are very much part of their negotiating skills. Recall I that I didn't just say sexuality and that I in fact said control of their own sexuality. That means the responsibility to maintain professionalism on the part of all negotiating. Being in charge of one's own sexuality does not give others the right to freely partake of it by a grab here or a pinch there. She has the final say about those boundaries as their negotiations should be no different than the negotiations of the educated and skilled Woman. That's because in either case, she's not selling her education or her body. She's selling herself and her ability to accomplish, because every Woman is unique.
Easy enough to say but difficult to do. So Women gaining charge of their own sexuality is a big part of their rights. Take a look at any country where Women don't have control of their body and sexuality and it is usually coupled with no education or voting rights as well.
How do Women with lesser education overcome fear of mingling with educated people? Self confidence. By being treated respectfully and no differently and by treating respectfully and no differently. That's enough to help any Women feeling ineptness with regard to knowledge or skills in which they feel they may be lacking.
Here's one example of how Hobbyist Seamstress Lisbeth G Clemens designed a quilt that conformed and proved a mathematical proof by Sir Roger Penrose on aperiodic tilings. Lisbeth is not a Mathematician but rather her knowledge of geometry is intuitive by nature and very much tied in with her talent for making quilts. Yet there is a distinct connection between her quilt and an abstract mathematical proof. Education gives us the means to speak the same language when communicating with others while investigating the nature of reality. It does not mean that we cannot comprehend or understand the phenomenon at play. The educated versus uneducated is yet another form of bifurcation to divide people. Remember that the first educational institutions were created and constructed by those without a formal education or accreditation. The instructors and lecturers who taught in them were mostly self taught or learned through meaningful discussion and debate with others of the same ilk. Education brings us standards with regard to skills acquired through formal instruction.
Anyway, its late and I'd better get some more rest. I'm going to need a lot of energy because I'm certain that I'll be attacked again tomorrow once enough people read this. Most likely it will be the kind of people who want to abuse me in order to make my demeanor appear different from the kind of person who'd have written this, so they can give the credit to someone else. However I'll try putting my name and my web site at the bottom of this to prevent that.
Stay Safe And Be Well,
Brian Joseph Johns
Encyclopedia BritannicaSir Roger Penrose
The Canadian EncyclopediaMatrimonial Property Acts
WikipediaRev. Jesse Jackson
Married Women's Property Acts
Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints
Google SearchRev. Jesse Jackson interviewed by Penthouse
Jehovah's Witnesses and Women's Rights
Catholic Church and Women's Rights
Lisbeth G Clemens' example of aperiodic tiling