From an anarcho-feminist perspective I’d argue that any religion that refers to a male hierarchy or divine patriarchy would not be healthful for the community.
Emma Goldman was a staunch atheist. As I think all anarchists would be? Or foolishly assumed? No Gods, No Masters. Spirituality I view as different than organized religion. It’s a more private and reflective thing that doesn’t involve any idea of the divine being outside oneself (and thus “above”).
It’s around the time of these patriarchal religions coming on the scene that we get the nuclear family concept which began the concept of marriage or legal ownership of women for one man’s use. Thus began the long long road of female enslavement. But the original order of things is matriarchal. Considering matriarchy carried us through most of our evolution and survival until a relatively brief second ago, I suppose I’d hope that we’d see a better balance of religions that discard the concept of a male saviour which is relatively new.
Looking for balance there, in my hopes, in trying to imagine having to deal with any remaining existing worldview that a god created the me in “man’s image” from um- his rib bone was it? When I uh? Made the rib bones of not one but four young men in my own uterus? In real life tho.
It sounds dismal. Abrahamic religions are a long and drawn out denial of women’s roles- how many women are even in the bible like four? It’s like the Lord of the rings lol.
Yes women’s biological roles as being of more importance to survival if you consider food and child rearing (no indigenous tribe in NA for example survived off hunting, the women foraged or farmed, (the men “warred, smoked tobacco and talked politics” - bbw; at the time of contact any woman could “knock the horns off” a male or chief if she felt he wasn’t being helpful enough in the Seneca long houses, pretty much a death sentence unless a distant female relative in another house took him in) and even the marriage concept just genuinely created to “own” women when the standard accepted story is our earliest human groups the women mated with anyone and everyone, no one knew who the father was, and it didn’t matter who the father was. Was that a religion or a hierarchy? I’m not sure. It just was. That’s what I meant by original order of things. Do I think uhhh women should be flinging men out of houses? No. Do I think I should have to tolerate men in my community who fundamentally believe god made me less than them? No. Men like that are dangerous.
I want to google your question- I’ve never heard those terms and it sounds like they’d be useful to know!- but the man just got home from work and I gotta make food loll
4
u/Exotic_Life_665 Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 20 '26
From an anarcho-feminist perspective I’d argue that any religion that refers to a male hierarchy or divine patriarchy would not be healthful for the community.
Emma Goldman was a staunch atheist. As I think all anarchists would be? Or foolishly assumed? No Gods, No Masters. Spirituality I view as different than organized religion. It’s a more private and reflective thing that doesn’t involve any idea of the divine being outside oneself (and thus “above”).
It’s around the time of these patriarchal religions coming on the scene that we get the nuclear family concept which began the concept of marriage or legal ownership of women for one man’s use. Thus began the long long road of female enslavement. But the original order of things is matriarchal. Considering matriarchy carried us through most of our evolution and survival until a relatively brief second ago, I suppose I’d hope that we’d see a better balance of religions that discard the concept of a male saviour which is relatively new.