Voices from a film on faith: 'Religion and women are like a game of seesaw'

[trotsky]

https://scroll.in/reel/883559/voices-from-a-film-on-faith-religion-and-women-are-like-a-game-of-seesaw

No discussion about women’s empowerment is complete without an examination of the role that religion has played in enforcing gender hierarchies. That complex interconnection goes back centuries, spans continents, and has proved stubbornly difficult to weed out. So when 29-year-old Disha Arora decided to make her first film, this was precisely the place she wanted to start. Her documentary Women and Religion in India was premiered by the Kriti Film Club in Delhi on June 15, after a couple of public screenings in the United States of America.

...Her experience in the non-profit sector had also showed her that when it comes to women’s rights, no real change is possible without examining the role of religion in society. “We always talk about changing the mindset of people and I think we definitely cannot ignore the dynamics of structures like religion and caste when we are trying to do that,” she said. “Religion is something which in India you just can’t escape.”

The documentary features a range of voices – a grassroots activist in Uttar Pradesh, a professor in Rajasthan, a Christian nun in Kerala, scholars in Jammu and Kashmir, a housewife in Pune – belonging to all major Indian religions, including Hinduism, Islam, Sikkhism, Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism and Zoroastrianism. Two lessons emerge. One is that no religion, no matter how liberal its antecedents, is free from discrimination. The second is that while the lived experience of religion may differ from one faith, region, and social class to another, the core – that women are kept out of positions of power – stays the same.

...One of the interviewees, a housewife from Maharashtra, best captures this tenuous relationship: “Religion and women are like a game of seesaw. One goes up, the other goes down – when religion wins, women lose.”

[MineralMan]

1. Rings true, doesn't it?

[Lordquinton]

2. Theists need to accept that parts of their religion can be bad

It's not that atheists can't accept the good, it's that theists have to defend the bad. Like original sin, the whole thing is based on hating women, until that is removed, then it can't be seen as a good thing.

Even with the Jesus myth to turn it around that still cements it as a core part of the religion. God forgives us for what eve did which was bring knowledge.

I dunno where to go with this, but my main point is that there are harmful parts of religion that are so ingrained that even liberal believers feel the urge to.defend them.

[Pendrench]

10. Hi Lordquinton - I agree with you that believers (such as myself) need to accept that parts of our

religion can be (and are) bad.

In fact, I will go one step further, and say that not only do we need to accept this fact, but we also must work to the best of our abilities to enact positive changes.

It may not be easy - and it may not be immediately effective - but in my opinion, we need to try.

Wishing you well and peace.

Tim

[guillaumeb]

3. Far too simplistic.

And the millions of theistic women would disagree with you as well.

[trotsky]

4. How nice of you to completely dismiss what these women have to say.

I guess you, as a man, know better.

[Mariana]

5. What can 200 women have to say

about their own experiences and observations that's important or relevant in any way?

[trotsky]

6. Well, if it contradicts what gil thinks they have experienced...

then nothing. Their views are "simplistic" to him.

[MineralMan]

7. You speak for women, now?

How patriarchal of you...

[Mariana]

8. That's what a lot of the women who were interviewed experienced

from the religious men in their lives. Isn't that interesting?

[MineralMan]

9. It's certainly not surprising.

The patriarchal nature of most religions has been keeping women "in their place" for centuries. All one has to do is look at the largest Christian denomination of all. It has consigned women to a reproductive role all along, and is still solidly opposed to women having any place in its hierarchy.

Offensive.

[Act_of_Reparation]

11. "Not all white people are racist"

Because your personal indignation is what's most important here.

[Mariana]

12. It's certainly more important than the experiences and observations

of the 200 women interviewed for this film.

Gil must not have read the piece before he spouted off. He seems to believe that only atheist women were interviewed, but in fact religious women's voices were not excluded at all:

"The documentary features a range of voices – a grassroots activist in Uttar Pradesh, a professor in Rajasthan, a Christian nun in Kerala, scholars in Jammu and Kashmir, a housewife in Pune – belonging to all major Indian religions, including Hinduism, Islam, Sikkhism, Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism and Zoroastrianism."

I don't notice atheism listed there, so it's possible that all of the women were religious.

[marylandblue]

13. Have you spoken to those millions of women?

You always say you speak only for yourself, how can you speak for them?

[trotsky]

14. Even gil won't try to defend this latest embarrassment.

He'll probably just mumble something about the "choir" and his "11th commandment" and start a new thread telling atheists what it is they believe.

[marylandblue]

15. I know, but I thought I'd ask anyway.