Feminist Friday: Lapsed Catholicism

Last Friday, feminists who are still holding out some hope for Catholicism (or am I really the last one of this tribe?) received a mighty wound with the latest revisions on doctrine that included denying women ordination in the same bill as how the church should deal with pedophiles.

While there were some apologists who were quick to say that ordaining a woman priest was not exactly the same kind of sin as ordained priests practicing pedophilia, obviously there were enough people thinking about the two points close enough where they ended up in the same document.

In fact, in the first AP article I read, this "apology" was stated as so:

Sexual abuse and pornography are more grave delicts, they are an egregious violation of moral law,” Monsignor Scicluna said in his first public appearance since the sex abuse crisis hit. “Attempted ordination of women is grave, but on another level, it is a wound that is an attempt against the Catholic faith on the sacramental orders.”

A wound on the Church?  What about covering up pedophilia and reassigning priests… you know, actively, by the Church?

Same article reminds readers that ordaining a female priest is punishable by excommunication.

Remind me now, how many pedophile priests have been excommunicated?  How many bishops and higher church officials - you know, like the pope - who actively reassigned and covered this up have been excommunicated?

Last count that I recall - and please correct me if I'm wrong: Big Fat 0.

Well, in the new revisions, excommunication of pedophiles can occur now.  However, per this Christian Science Monitor Article, "Currently, women or those ordaining women are quickly excommunicated as a violation of sacramental law… Priests found abusing children, however, are disciplined under a different canonical law and rarely excommunicated." 

Ok, CSM says abusive priests are "rarely excommunicated," but several minutes on Google could reveal no news about any excommunicated pedophiles.  Again - if you know otherwise, feel free to shine even that slender light of hope to me.

For those of you unfamiliar with how grave excommunication is, the faith of the Church is that only those accepted by the Church through the proper sacraments are saved from Hell.  Excommunication is the denial of those required sacraments for Salvation by being thrown out of the Church.  So, if you are a more literal and firm believer in Catholocism, then Excommunication = Eternal Burning in Hell. 

Do not pass Go, do not collect $200… you get the picture.

So, alas, God cannot save certain God-fearing women who wanted to follow in His footsteps, nor those who support them, 'cos his Church says so: "Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven" (Matthew 18:18 or 16:19, depending on your version).   All those child molesters: They can still be forgiven.

This brilliant little bit of revisionism may not exactly say that ordaining women is the same (or worse) sin as priestly pedophilia, but G-ddamnit if it doesn't punish such a wounding crime worse than.

Now, the apology article later released on Friday further backpedaled in denial of any intent to classify women's ordination with pedophilia. 

A few problematic things still exist:

If they really didn't mean to create this sense of equal gravity, the Church is seriously blinded by their masculine privilege.  So blind, in fact, that they still don't see a problem with this despite the many progressive groups who are offended.

or

They know damn well it's wrong, but don't want to give up their positions of privilege to actually connect with the needs of the people they're supposed to be protecting and caring for - not just regarding the hatred of ordaining women, but regarding the lack of empathy for abuse victims across the globe.

or, as Dr. Mary E. Hunt points out in her essay for Religion Dispatches:

"Either these gentlemen are more ethically tone deaf than one can imagine, or they are sly beyond the dreams of foxes in an effort to redirect attention from the criminal behavior of clergy against children to their wrath over the ordination of women."

Logically, emotionally, spiritually: this is disgusting. 

Personally, my Church no longer represents Christ, but Judas Iscariot.  I am betrayed. 

Through my childhood and young adulthood I was blessed with wonderful priests who went out into the community, supported the individuals, knew parishioners by name, and would be willing to have a logical discussion with a wayward 12-year-old (that would be me) about Bible interpretations.  In college, the nun who helped run the Catholic Student Organization was a feminist and pointed out that all of the intellectual discussions and debates Jesus had were with women!  Not only that, but only the women seemed able to have a disagreement with Him without getting chewed out for not listening or hearing with their hearts.  Besides God, the only person Jesus took orders from "on screen": His Mother!  

"Son, you've got to help out our friends at this wedding."

"But, Mo-om -"

"Jesus!" 

I can so see that mom look, too.  I've been on the receiving end of it enough times.  The Bible painted it more like she pleaded, and he did it to be nice, but I know too many Catholic and Jewish mothers to think he did it just to make her feel good.  No, Mary knew He'd do it because she was His mother, and you listen to your Mother!  Even if you are the Son of God.

If the pope is going for a "literal" translation of the Bible, as theologian Karl Joseph Kuschel also argues in the CSM article, why isn't there a Mother figure ruling over the human symbol of Christ to keep things in line?

I bet if there was, this pedophile issue would have been nipped in the bud much sooner and to many more people's satisfaction, women would be priests, and a lot fewer people would be leaving the Catholic church because it's betrayed their deepest trust.

Hook, Line, and Sinking

I've been doing a lot of editing & training of tutors lately…

When I see someone pounce on an introduction lacking a "hook," my first mental image is that hook that sneaks onstage during a Vaudeville show to yank off performers who have overstayed their welcome.

I know that's not the metaphor or image this piece of advice is going for, but I've seen it used so often - and often so generically! - that I want to yank this piece of advice off stage.

The idea for the "hook," as far as I know, comes from fishing.  You want to hook your slippery reader and reel them into make your point (which, hopefully, isn't to eat them for dinner).  That's all fine and well until you consider that fish don't bite down on any old hook.  Not if it’s the wrong size, and most certainly not if it isn't baited properly.

What I see in most of the "hook" lessons and comments, however, is an empty hook that gives no thought to what kind of fish the writer is looking to reel in.  I mean, just go to any sporting goods department in any cheap store and you've got at least one wall of different bait for different fish.  You're not going to use flies, for example, to hook a bottom-feeding catfish.

I see people and articles throw around advice like "use statistics," "use a rhetorical question," "use a poignant quote," as if they could apply to any piece of writing.  It's a gimmick, one size fits all, Abracadabra: You've got a hook!

Turn it into a late night infomercial!  With exclamation points and question marks!?!  (And if you read the rest of this paper RIGHT NOW…)

As for writing, a generic hook is at best, insufficient and at worst, will drive away audience instead of entice.

More important than any hook is knowing your audience.  Why on earth would your audience need to read this?  (You may remember that question from that post about self-centered writers.)  Especially for bloggers who have an audience already distracted by lots of shiny, stinky, wriggling, brightly baited hooks, ask: What do your readers want?  If you're giving readers what they want, you don't even need to gouge a hook through their poor cheek and reel them in.  They'll come willingly, hooked by the message and the point - not a dull, painful gimmick.  This goes for just about any writing, from the first line of a query to the first line of a novel to the subject line of the email.  It should be clear why your reader should care about the topic.

If you know your audience likes statistics or rhetorical questions (unlike Nathan Bransford), go for it.  On the other hand, your audience might like more of a narrative opening.  Or they might like getting thrown into the action.  Some might even like a combination of things! 

If you ask people who regularly fish for advice, you should grab a beer and sit your butt down.  You'll hear about different bait for different locations, good times for different kinds of fish, the best way to hold a fishing rod, and you may even see a lot of handmade bait or bait combinations.  Catching fish is serious business, and these folks know what they're talking about.

A good writer should be just as flexible.  I open a food trade article differently than I start a restaurant review.  Both of those have different introductions than my blog, which is also different from how I decide my first lines of fiction.

Hooking your reader - getting them to read what you wrote - is an entirely different animal than just presenting a hook.  It's a willingness to be involved and know your audience - to care about your audience - so they understand what you're writing is important to them.  You don't want them to just swallow a your message, hook, line, and sinker, you want them to be involved in the message because it matters.

Now, who's up for fly fishing?

Newsie, Newsie, News, News, News

Grab your vice-drink of choice and your comfy chair: Lotsa stuff going on!

xx

(Some of you may remember K.S. Augustin as one of the first sponsors for the Bay State Equine Rescue Blogathon.  More thanks for that!  Now, go visit her site and buy some fab books!)

So… I'm supposed to pass the award on and tell you 7 things about me that you might not already know (or something like that).

7.  This September 30th, I'll be celebrating my 10th Wedding Anniversary.  (God, I'm getting old!)

6.  Although I love horses, I maybe only go riding 2-4 times a year.

5.  Like Kaz, I also hate reality shows.

4.  I still think David Tennant is the BEST DOCTOR EVAR!

3.  I used to make jewelry and all presents when I was a teen.  The jewelry bug never left me (see below.)

2.  I run a podcast for Broad Universe called the Broad Pod.  (Ok, you may have known this already, but PROMO!!)

1.  I think bladed weapons (and kitchen untensils) are pretty.

And I'll go with 7 people to send this to:  Aimee Weinstein, Luc Joseph, Inanna Arthen, Suzanne Reynolds-Alpert, Teresa Jusino, Brenna Lyons, and Kelly Harmon.   Enjoy!

xx

I took my time posting this, but I want to show off, finally:

I made pretty necklaces!

This one is lapis, shell, and round beads with the main pendant an old Avon ® one I found when I went through my extensive jewelry collection not too long ago.

This one is adventurine, rose quartz, and silver with a cameo locket that I also found in my old jewelry collection. And let me tell you, with that filigree, it was a total bitch to photograph clearly! This is 1/3 of the reason I don't post a ton of photos on my blog. (1/3 is that I usually am having to much fun to remember to take photos, and the other 1/3 is because the cable thingy to download from the camera has gone missing.)

In any case, adore the pretty shiny!

Thanks, Renée for teaching me how to bead!

xx

Scott dragged my lazy arse outside yesterday to work on the garden despite the icky heat and my pitiful inhaler puffs and adamant "don't wanna!!!" complaints. It was for the best. I harvested some herbs and made a lovely alter setting to dry some of them... while Scott turned the rest of the surplus mint into mojitos. (Incidentally, you local people, would you like some mint and/or lemon balm? Seriously!)

Even cooler, though, the red-tailed hawk that has lived on our property since Scott was a kid (or perhaps her descendents - how long to red-tailed hawks live?) was taking her older-than-fledglings out to practice hunting in the woods where we throw all of the organic yard waste. There's an opening that looks down a cliff there; it's really beautiful - but you'll have to imagine. I didn't have the camera. In any case, Herself is a big freaking hawk, but her kids were all a bit smaller than crows - but it was sooooo cool to watch them jumping around and screeching to each other. (Besides, even if I DID have the camera, they were totally all "cloaking engaged." I'm lucky I saw them at all, and it was quite the switcheroo that I saw them before H-of-A, aka Eagle Eyes.)

xx

At Readercon, I TOTALLY SOLD OUT of my Bad-Ass Faeries 3: In All Their Glory copies! Yaay! I'll get more in when I can… but you could go over to Amazon and buy them, too. :)

xx

I was recently interviewed by Valerie Hadden, Pagan columnist for the Boston Examiner.com.  We ended up going all silly about animals, so enjoy!  She also quoted me in her recent "Faerie Quotes" article, too.  Yay press - Thank you, Val. :) 

xx

Believe it or not: I've got blog posts done ahead for this week!!

- gasp! -

I'll wait a second for you to still your shocked heart. Good? 'Kay then.

Wednesday, I'm talking about "hooks" and Friday you will get to see my rant (hopefully tempered some by then with further research) on the Catholic Church, pedophiles, and women priests that I didn't post last Friday in lieu of continued begging for sponsors for my Bay State Equine Rescue Blogathon.

That said, I also gave a Yay to Sword & Saga's 100k challenge.  Yeah - not so great there.  Hopefully, I can make up the difference this week - and actually take some time to total up my measly fiction and non-fic word counts for the past week. 

That said, a good 4 hours of Friday was comic book work, which includes sketching… ideas on how to calculate thumbnails/rough sketches for word count?  If a picture is 1000 words, could each page layout be 500 words?  If so… my word count isn't quite the pittance I'm estimating.  Thoughts?

xx

I'm on page 3, and it's 3AM, and I have to wake up in enough time to make some calls for an article tomorrow… because, well, I still do those article things for pay. I've had more by-lines as myself (rather than my alternate personality) in Worcester Magazine, though, so feel free to check out my food finds there, too!

xx

So, what's knew with y'all?

Bad-Ass Faeries 3: In All Their Glory

Fundraising Friday

I've been happily filling up slots for my Bay State Equine Rescue Blogathon, but there are still more - and I would love to have every slot filled to help us out.

To give you an idea about some of the work we do in the community, BSER was recently contacted about a backyard farm that was housing 6 mustangs, 4 cows, and 2 goats all together.  They were living without food, in each others feces, with stagnant water.  The two horses in the picture, Coco and Rudy, show how thin these poor guys were.

BSER was instrumental in handling this case from finding homes for the mustangs to working the authorities in regards to the neglect.

This is what we do, on so many levels.

We work with authorities.

We network extensively to find homes for animals in need: whether they be backyard neglect cases or families of horses in meat pens.

We directly intervene on behalf of horses in need.  For example, we are currently working with friends and colleagues at the excellent Misty Rose Arabians who have kindly taken in two of the mustang ponies.  Jessica Chickering, a brilliant trainer, had planned on only taking one, but when she saw them, she had to take two.

None of the mustang ponies were handled much by humans.  One of the theories of their background were they were taken in from one of the Bureau of Land Management round-ups designed to lower the horse and burro populations out west (or make room for more cattle grazing and/or human expansion, depending on who you ask).  As some of the round-up mustangs end up at auctions, that means they are likely to get picked up for slaughter.  So, the horses are yanked from their natural habitat to provide the wealthy with high-end cuisine in Europe and Japan.

In any case, BSER has also worked in helping legislation for more humane treatment of wild horses and burros, too.

So, please, give me a hand in helping the rescue continue their good work - and I will be happy to promote the hell out of you in my Blogathon.  Here's the levels of sponsorship again:

• Your own blog interview: I interview you, include pictures you provide, and tell the world why they need to hire you or buy your products/books/etc. - $40 sponsorship
• Your own blog feature: 700 words of your own to tell the world about yourself with up to 2 pictures. - $35 sponsorship
• Sponsor one of my blog posts: I'll give you a 50-word blurb before one of my planned posts about equine rescue, horses, horse care, or equine legislation. - $20
• Twitter/Facebook-mania: Why people should buy your product/hire you in 140 characters or less. Posted to both my Twitter and Facebook accounts. - $10

And because times are tough, I'm even adding a $5 benefit for anyone who gives a donation and sends me a PayPal receipt of it by July 30th.  Just send me $5 and I'll mention you and/or your business and/or your product and service in my opening and closing Thank You notes - with a live link to your website.

Please consider helping more wonderful animals like Coco and Rudy.  And consider helping yourself to some advertising for your support.

You can donate to the BSER right with the below Apple link.  Or send me an email for more information.

I thank you - and the horses thank you!

Writing Challenge!

Fellow Broad, Hunter Liguore, posed a 100k challenge our discussion list and the Sword & Saga blog based on Stephen King's On Writing.

I wanted to jump on this right away, but hesitated.

For this month, I'd been running away to my favorite deli or coffee shop or art gallery just to steal a little time to write, and I've got, I think, almost 30 pages on Heather's story (the character, not the friend by that name), so about 7500 words, give or take. I've been missing meeting with my artist friend for the comic book, which is on about 20-some-odd scripted pages (which, of course, is more written pages than pages scripted). Fortunately, Stef (artist friend) now has a new studio! On top of that, there's still the Apocalyptic YA I'm working on with Christy.

So, I'm behind on all that, not counting short stories and submissions.

I also (obviously) have fallen behind on non-fiction - as I'm just updating my blog again after a whole week.

There was a big rush in training and work in my tutoring position, and recently Readercon to plan for, but it's time I reconnoiter and … get back on that horse of productivity again!

I'm taking the challenge!

Just - as I normally do - in my own way. My 100k will be split between fiction & non-fiction.

So, 5k writing fiction each week + 5k writing non-fiction.

And, except for my really long essay-esque emails regarding teaching/tutoring/feminism/news etc. to my discussion groups, email DOES NOT COUNT. Blogging totally counts, as does any actual non-fic assignments. I'll do a breakdown each week, too, so watch for it on Twitter and possibly here.

I have a theory, in any case, that my non-fic writing is already at + 5k. However, if it's not, it's damn good excuse to do some ahead-of-time blogging!

Who's with me?

*The pic is from our tour of Fort Sumter while we were in South Carolina. Scott got a nice shot of me looking hopeful as I head through a new doorway. I like the metaphor for this challenge.

July Episode 6: Let the Battle Begin!

  
Download now or listen on posterous

July Broad Pod Episodev2-New.mp3 (12793 KB)

Welcome to the July Edition of the Broad Pod!  This month, we're looking at Broads who don't shy away from a fight.  Artist and Writer Rae Lori guest hosts this military- and battle-themed episode.

Enjoy readings from Diane Whiteside's Captive Desires, Gail Z. Martin's Dark Lady's Chosen,  Phoebe Wray's Jemma7729, Danielle Ackley-McPhail's "First Line: An Alliance Archive Adventure" from So It Begins, Book Two of the Defending the Future series, and Sue Burke's English translation of Amadis of Gaul.

Pick your side - and enjoy the fight!

Posted via email from The Broad Pod posterous

Writing for...

As a matter of fact, the world does not revolve around you.

Also, not everyone is like you.

It blows my mind that despite the fact so much of our globe is sharing an Internet culture, so many of the students and writers I work with have no concept of the fact their "audience" isn't themselves and people identically like them.

Whether it be trying to write a thesis statement about a specific brand of Christian "salvation" or using compare/contrast to find a place for you - and only you - to eat… or discussing local laws or local "celebrities," why should your audience care? Whom are you writing for, and why are you writing?

This is an important point that far too many instructors seem to miss (or end up missing due to making sure there's time to study to whatever No Child Left Behind test the area is using). Writing is a communication tool. If you assume everyone thinks, acts, behaves, and lives like you, then you will miscommunicate at best or, at worst, offend or insult. Either way, you've got problems.

Not only do I see this problem with the students I work with, but it's something you need to consider in ALL writing. In some of the weaker blogs, tweets, and Facebook updates I've come across, that's exactly the problem. It's especially problematic in Internet advertising - even with all the crazy things websites and groups try to do to target me as their audience based on what I post on my blog and/or Facebook and/or Twitter. If you're writing a business proposal, memo, or email, you absolutely have to know your audience if - in all honesty - you want to get whatever it is you want.

A proper cynic realizes this: the audience is selfish. They are in it for themselves. If you want their support, you need to know what they want and give it to them.

Does that mean you can't write for yourself or write what's in your heart? Of course not!

If you want to just write in a journal with yourself as the audience, go for it.

If you want to write something that others will clamor to read, you need to at least be aware of what they want, what they want to read. For you fiction writers, it may very well be the same emotions and feelings you want to write about. Great! But don't forget your audience.

Look at your point (or your plot). Why do you care about it? What about this point/plot moves you? In papers and assigned articles, sometimes that's hard to find because you're writing to an assignment. You have to find something to care about for the paper/article. With fiction, look at your characters for motivation. Why do you care about them? Why do they care what will happen next? Is it something others can relate to?

If you're not sure, ask someone. Fiction writers - good ones - have trusted beta readers for just that reason. For a lot of my articles, I'll bounce my point off of a friend (and return the favor, of course, for said friend/s) until I find what clicks. Sometimes that exercise can take as long as the article writing, itself, but it's absolutely important.

Hopefully you realize that the world doesn't revolve around you. Also, hopefully, you're smart enough to realize your audience may believe it revolves around them - and write accordingly.