Before I delve into the boundaries between the two, I will first briefly define them:
Liberation theology centralizes around oppressed people freeing themselves. Scripture passages that highlight liberation of the poor and marginalized bolster this movement, namely the story of Jesus Christ as told in the gospels. Oscar Romero, James H. Cone, and Diana L. Hayes are among the most prominent names in liberation theology. South American and Black religious communities are the strongest proponents of liberation theology, interweaving womanism (black women prioritizing the equality of black women among both race and gender lines) and mujeristas (Latinas working to liberate both the poor and oppressed in their culture, as well as their culture overall against colonial influences).
Prosperity theology prioritizes the embracing of God-given gifts, namely material gifts. The idea is that God has given the faithful these gifts, and it would be ungrateful to give away those gifts - charity, according to prosperity theology, is against God's will. There are communities, though, who do emphasize giving in order to receive, but the giving is almost exclusively to leaders who are already wealthy. Joel Osteen is the most famous proponent, and he is in good company with Southern charismatic churches and other televangelists. Almost all of these are white, with almost no references to any of the gospels.
I am by no means the first person to connect the Trump administration and its supporters to prosperity theology (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). "Make America Great Again" has never included greatness for anyone who benefits from liberation theology - the declaration of making Mexico pay for a wall dividing the nation from the United States makes this clear, among many other points.
Although I may prioritize the liberation of oppressed people, especially in the face of the oncoming administration, it is not about me. After all, it is because of my platform as an able-bodied white person that I can put forward liberation theology with reasonable expectation of being received by other able-boded white people. It is up to me to use the benefits I systemically receive from prosperity theologians, now that they are coming into their greatest political power yet, to work towards this liberation while also understanding that it is from these systems, including my role in them, that oppressed people must be liberated. It is up to me to keep in mind these intersections while also understanding that I, no matter how hard I work, am not separate from the ivory tower that is prosperity theology.
Diana L. Hayes described it better than I could. In her connection between womanism and liberation theology, she said that it would be logically inconsistent for her to work with feminists (see: white) because it is from us (see: white) that she must be liberated.
Showing posts with label intersectional feminism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label intersectional feminism. Show all posts
Monday, January 16, 2017
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Feminine Feminism
Some prominent foci of the current "4th Wave feminism*" are street harassment, intersectionality (though not often effective), and reclaiming femininity. Crafts & domestic projects have become incredibly popular as both personal and feminist statements recently, primarily among privileged (read: predominantly white) feminists. This isn't that different from the DIY movement of the early 90's, save that we have the internet now and crafts today are typically much more feminine than then. I suggest that Pinterest is the primary subcultural point.
A few months ago, an argument passed around tumblr debating that the popularity of Pinterest among women evidenced a move back toward domestic femininity...but that it isn't a bad or regressive thing. Femininity has long been a widespread cultural scapegoat: a woman must be feminine in order to have value, though femininity is weak + devalued in patriarchy. Reclaiming crafts, domesticity, and general prettiness is a way young, privileged women are putting power into femininity. In the 1950's, femininity was often displayed in order to attract & keep a mate (see: The Feminine Mystique, The Erotic Silence of the American Housewife, Pink Think, etc.); that's unheard of now: today's feminine feminists do it for ourselves.
I'm waiting for more people to say that the empowering of domesticity is connected to the current feminist focus of street harassment. Catcalls & stalking often push women back into our homes just for the safety, and more dialogue among women is engendered therein. Domestic crafts are a way of reclaiming the very femininity street harassers prey upon, while also connecting to other women. Pinterest (and tumblr, etsy) has become the women's bookstore of the 2010's.
Of course there are problems within this feminist movement, largely relating to race (as always). Crafts require time and money and a safe place, and the websites of exchange display mostly white able-bodied people, white aesthetics, English at around a 6th grade reading level. WOC designers & businesses are often celebrated by tumblrs that focus on race, rarely by tumblrs that focus on gender/sex (and are therefore white tumblrs). Transphobia isn't unusual either, "I didn't mean it that way, therefore it's not transphobic." I'd like to say that intersectionality is improving now, but I am able-bodied & white and it's not my place to make such judgements.
Beginning about 7 years ago, much mainstream media noted that domestic femininity was becoming more common among [white, privileged, cisgender] women. Many such journalists speculated that feminism was ending, women were going home in order to become housewives, etc. They were partly correct, but they couldn't see femininity as something powerful willingly chosen by strong individuals.
* I'm beginning to realize that the use of Waves as categorizing islands of angry women, as opposed to a point of generational reference in a larger context, is a divisive tool used primarily by mainstream media.
A few months ago, an argument passed around tumblr debating that the popularity of Pinterest among women evidenced a move back toward domestic femininity...but that it isn't a bad or regressive thing. Femininity has long been a widespread cultural scapegoat: a woman must be feminine in order to have value, though femininity is weak + devalued in patriarchy. Reclaiming crafts, domesticity, and general prettiness is a way young, privileged women are putting power into femininity. In the 1950's, femininity was often displayed in order to attract & keep a mate (see: The Feminine Mystique, The Erotic Silence of the American Housewife, Pink Think, etc.); that's unheard of now: today's feminine feminists do it for ourselves.
I'm waiting for more people to say that the empowering of domesticity is connected to the current feminist focus of street harassment. Catcalls & stalking often push women back into our homes just for the safety, and more dialogue among women is engendered therein. Domestic crafts are a way of reclaiming the very femininity street harassers prey upon, while also connecting to other women. Pinterest (and tumblr, etsy) has become the women's bookstore of the 2010's.
Of course there are problems within this feminist movement, largely relating to race (as always). Crafts require time and money and a safe place, and the websites of exchange display mostly white able-bodied people, white aesthetics, English at around a 6th grade reading level. WOC designers & businesses are often celebrated by tumblrs that focus on race, rarely by tumblrs that focus on gender/sex (and are therefore white tumblrs). Transphobia isn't unusual either, "I didn't mean it that way, therefore it's not transphobic." I'd like to say that intersectionality is improving now, but I am able-bodied & white and it's not my place to make such judgements.
Beginning about 7 years ago, much mainstream media noted that domestic femininity was becoming more common among [white, privileged, cisgender] women. Many such journalists speculated that feminism was ending, women were going home in order to become housewives, etc. They were partly correct, but they couldn't see femininity as something powerful willingly chosen by strong individuals.
* I'm beginning to realize that the use of Waves as categorizing islands of angry women, as opposed to a point of generational reference in a larger context, is a divisive tool used primarily by mainstream media.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)