IIRC, she wasn't just that - she had been trained in non-violent resistance.
Yes, she was the secretary for the Montgomery NAACP, although her action was that of a "private citizen," according to Wikipedia, which surprised me because I think I had her confused with Homer Plessy, who was specifically recruited to sit in a whites-only train car in order to kick off challenging segregation laws (which, in Plessy v. Ferguson, resulted in the 'separate but equal' doctrine).
Hey, Plessy's buried here! Cool.
yeah, Rosa Parks was an *activist* seamstress.(Not that activists don't get tired, too, as a half-assed one. But she knew she was starting stuff up.)
I think the feminist blog comment thread argument (it was on feministing several years ago) that made me roll my eyes the most was, for a post about a new book looking at Judaism and the Hebrew Bible from a feminist perspective, someone was arguing at length that it's impossible to look at the bible from a feminist perspective, because the bible is inherently anti-feminist, because G-d raped Mary.
Shir, I thought this editorial from a Jewish newspaper in New Jersey was interesting. [link] (For some context on this paper, it's for the suburbs of NYC, and will usually have some articles about Israeli politics, but the bulk of the paper is local news -- the cover article this week is about how Zumba, a new dance exercise class, is getting very popular at the Jewish Community Center, and there's another big article about an 11-year-old girl who's baking cookies and selling them to raise money for charity.)
because the bible is inherently anti-feminist, because G-d raped Mary.
Er, say what now? At least in all the Bible teaching I've heard, God ASKED, and she said yes! I mean, per Catholic teachings she was all special-born-without-sin blah blah, so I guess she didn't have a choice in THAT part, but...are we talking statutory here?
Er, say what now? At least in all the Bible teaching I've heard, God ASKED, and she said yes! I mean, per Catholic teachings she was all special-born-without-sin blah blah, so I guess she didn't have a choice in THAT part, but...are we talking statutory here?
I have no idea. I was trying not to get into that part of the argument, since I was arguing that the entire thing was irrelevant to a discussion of Judaism.
StW texted me this morning, asking if I had NYE plans. He texted me first and I haven't answered him yet. I WIN.
BWAH! But go team you!
I am slowly becoming less invested in caring about M's mom's antics; I know it doesn't SEEM like it, because I bitch here all the time, but I HAVE to share some of the craxy, and then I let it go.
Aren't y'all LUCKY?! /sarcasm
I think the feminist blog comment thread argument (it was on feministing several years ago) that made me roll my eyes the most was, for a post about a new book looking at Judaism and the Hebrew Bible from a feminist perspective, someone was arguing at length that it's impossible to look at the bible from a feminist perspective, because the bible is inherently anti-feminist, because G-d raped Mary
Hil, REALLY?! That's insaneovision.
Well, to be fair, the bible isn't too awesome toward women.
Why is Mary in the Old Testament?
I mean - I agree with Hil - how is Mary relevant to a discussion of Judaism?
how is Mary relevant to a discussion of Judaism?
fair question.
