Vindictive shaming vs. a “pro-family” bias

We could expect a provocative and divisive position from a facebook source called ” Americans Against The Republican Party,” right? Here is an image and a commentary.

I wrote:

That irony is not very logical- not that it was meant to be logical. The speaker makes a claim about what is sin or not, and then about how God feels. Then, he condemns comments about what is or is not sin and so on. That is not going to sway many people- to condescend.

There have been cultures with lots of homosexual activity– even little subcultures like like prisons or like San Francisco in the 1850s when there were thousands of men there mining gold and… literally dozens of women. There have also been cultures where heterosexual promiscuity was especially discouraged- sometimes very ferociously- like you might expect in a time of famine or other crisis. 

We have, at least in big urban areas, a cultural swing away from valuing procreation and children and parenting. Birth rates may drop, but eventually there may be another wave of accelerated economic growth and a more “family friendly” cultural norm.

We also may notice a trend toward antagonism and divisiveness and even rage. There is a lot of blaming going around lately- a surge of contentiousness.

Some people forecast these trends of social psychology. We noticed them earlier than most people and even measured them. We noticed them sweep through various cultures at various times, like the relaxing of traditional gender roles in Japan beginning in the 1990s.

One general pattern is that during economic contractions (like the 24-year “recession” in Japan), people may just not be as concerned about other people’s personal lives… Generally speaking. There can be the intense and polarizing condemnation of the various scapegoated traitors (political leaders, corporate leaders, religious leaders) and a general disinterest in what the average stranger in the next county is doing in their private lives. People do not value the luxury of “social engineering” of things like promoting marital fidelity. It just doesn’t generate the moral polarity that it could in boom times.

Say it loud, I'm straight and I'm proud

Say it loud, I’m straight and I’m proud (Photo credit: charles.hope)

<>

So, unlike the US in the 50s, it is now rather normal to have multiple spouses- just not at once. People get married, then divorced, then married again, then…. 

The stability of lifelong marriage (and what that meant for things like birth rates and the emotional health of younger generations) is waning. Many people have kids and then get divorced and cease heterosexual activities. That avoids having multiple wives/husbands, but obviously also means that the frequency of families with a relatively high number of kids like 4 kids is dropping.

Rita and John's Marriage Certificate

Rita and John’s Marriage Certificate (Photo credit: mary hodder)

The person who posted the image replied (in full):

“or if people realized how pompous and sanctimonious they sound…”

I added:

I am not clear on your comment. I do not know if you are open to thoughts and experiences that are unfamiliar to you. In case you are….

For me, there could be 5 people who each have their favorite cause. They are each sincere and passionate. Modern controversial examples include gun control and abortion. In the past, the legalization or prohibition of alcohol (or of slavery) was a big debate.

So, if I listen to all 5 people present their case, I may notice that some seem quite vindictive and adversarial (and perhaps some relatively humble). If I am neutral on an issue or even totally unfamiliar with it, then the one who is vindictive and adversarial MIGHT be least effective in attracting my empathy and interest.

Back to the case in point. “everyone knows” that there is such a thing as a cultural bias for heterosexuality over homosexuality. It is not a “new shocking development,” right?

In elementary school, the top 3 insults that boys would say to each other where I grew up were: “you are such a baby” and “you are a girl” and “you are a fag.” Of course, little girls would also use these words as insults- including towards boys.

Consider that many young kids are using the word fag as an insult before they even know what it means. It just generally means to them a socially less-valued person.

Since the word usually refers to males, we might even notice that a little kid could call a female a fag, thus showing that the child does not even really know what they are talking about. They are just repeating an insult that they overheard.

So, there is no intense cultural shaming around gun control or the use of alcohol. There is, at least in some cultures, in regard to homosexual activity.

Maybe you think there should be no shaming. I consider that unrealistic. Are little children going to stop calling each other babies as insults? That is unlikely. They will find some insult as they create social hierarchies.

So, is it a sin for an actual baby to be a baby? Perhaps not. Is it a sin to insult other people? Is it a sin if I say something and then other people say it is frightening or insulting or demeaning or pompous or vindictive?

Huge numbers of people are repeatedly exposed to the idea that homosexual activity is less socially acceptable than heterosexual activity. So, if someone’s public position is to criticize and shame those huge numbers of people for their own cultural background, that is not a very diplomatic way of attracting sympathy.

There is the issue of shaming. Yes, there is shaming of children by children for such things as being like a baby somehow, or if a male is “too effeminate” (or if a female is “too masculine”). There is also the issue of shaming people for having any systematic favoritism or bias or preferences. Should I be ashamed if I have one wife (and some children because) someone may think I am “too pro-family” and criticize me? Even gay republicans may be repulsed by such shaming of the mainstream. It may be ineffective to appeal to the mainstream by shaming them.

Marriage Day

Marriage Day (Photo credit: Fikra)

Is a pro-family bias the mainstream consensus (by pro-family, I mean pro-heterosexual reproduction, which is personally my favorite kind of reproduction). I think the mainstream consensus is pro-family. I might even hope that it is! 😉

Note that pro-family basically means pro-reproduction which means basically pro-womb or pro-mother (pro-woman). You cannot promote healthy motherhood at the same time as distracting attention away from healthy motherhood.

The origin of the word marriage is the same as the word matrimony, which is the same as the word mate (mating) and matrix (which means womb). So, either you are pro-womb (pro-reproduction) or  directing attention toward something else. Both are valid uses of attention. Both are quite distinct, though.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: