Sexual Violence is never funny. Never ever not ever.
I was listening to Esther while doing the washing up ears all pricked to listen to the detail of Vashti's story when the word Eunuch suddenly hit me between the eye's and my stomach turned as the full horror of that word settled.
According to Wikapedia 'Castration was typically carried out on the soon-to-be eunuch without his consent in order that he might perform a specific social function; this was common in many societies.' So it is totally inappropriate to describe men as going to their mums and saying 'hey I got a job' or to describe their mum's reaction as disappointment because of lack of grandchildren.
Not only is castration an act of sexual violence but it is violence against children since it is performed on pre-pubescent. It is a grotesque practise. And it just plain isn't funny.
There are twelve eunucs named in the book of Esther. Twelve little boys who were grosley violated: Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, Abagtha, Zethar, Carkas Hegai, Shaashgaz, Hathach, Bigthana and Teresh.
I'm not one for reading loads into numbers in the bible but I do find it interesting that there are 12 named.
These boys who grew up into men are not non-people. They are not as they where described last sunday 'men who used to have good lives' - they are men who live lives and it is for them to define whether they are good or not. The abuse they experienced did not stop them being human, one of the reasons I think the bible chooses to name them, while not bothering to name the 'princes'.
Among the Achamenide Persians, of which Xerxes was one, political eunuchism was an established institution. Apparently a Eunuch was assumed to have less ties to the military and family and not be interested in establishing their own dynasty so could be trusted to give good advice and loyal service and could hold positions of significant "power".
Though clearly not the power of self determination, if they had a power to influence the king, they had it in the context of a loss of personal freedom, since they where essentially enslaved.
The Eunucs are mentioned 11 times in the book of Esther. Esthers relationship to the Eunucs shifts dramatically between chapter 2 and 4. In chapter 2 the Eunuchs are described as being 'in charge' of 'the kings women' but by chapter 4 they are being described as 'her Eunuchs'. In most other verses they are described as the king's so Esther's transition to Queen gives her derived power over the Eunics though I imagine it would be shaky and dependent on continued favour with the king.
Anyway the Eunuchs are in most places described as belonging to someone. They have become possessions. Eunuchs I guess where the ancient worlds answer to the question who will guard the women? It cannot be women because we cannot give them authority or power, nor can it be men because we cannot trust them not to be craving our own position of power and influence, and we cannot trust them not to rape and pillage, and any offspring must be ours.
So we will violate a man so that he is able to serve our purposes because he is now a non-person and no longer a threat.
Interestingly Xerxes assassination was assisted by a Eunuch - and we read about an attempt in the book of Esther also.
Not all men do that well in patriarchy.
There is so much stuff about masculinities floating around the Christian world, it breaks my heart to see gender non-conforming men being silenced as not Christian or "real men" because they don't like mountain climbing or whatever other way people have decided men NEED to demonstrate their masculinity. The kingdom of heaven turns everything on it's head.
Isaiah 54:4-5 says:
Sexual Violence is never ok. And the fact that we find it funny, and don't even see it as violence when the victims of the crime are men is deeply disturbing and evidence of the ubiquitous patriarchy that surrounds us.
I was listening to Esther while doing the washing up ears all pricked to listen to the detail of Vashti's story when the word Eunuch suddenly hit me between the eye's and my stomach turned as the full horror of that word settled.
According to Wikapedia 'Castration was typically carried out on the soon-to-be eunuch without his consent in order that he might perform a specific social function; this was common in many societies.' So it is totally inappropriate to describe men as going to their mums and saying 'hey I got a job' or to describe their mum's reaction as disappointment because of lack of grandchildren.
Not only is castration an act of sexual violence but it is violence against children since it is performed on pre-pubescent. It is a grotesque practise. And it just plain isn't funny.
There are twelve eunucs named in the book of Esther. Twelve little boys who were grosley violated: Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, Abagtha, Zethar, Carkas Hegai, Shaashgaz, Hathach, Bigthana and Teresh.
I'm not one for reading loads into numbers in the bible but I do find it interesting that there are 12 named.
These boys who grew up into men are not non-people. They are not as they where described last sunday 'men who used to have good lives' - they are men who live lives and it is for them to define whether they are good or not. The abuse they experienced did not stop them being human, one of the reasons I think the bible chooses to name them, while not bothering to name the 'princes'.
Among the Achamenide Persians, of which Xerxes was one, political eunuchism was an established institution. Apparently a Eunuch was assumed to have less ties to the military and family and not be interested in establishing their own dynasty so could be trusted to give good advice and loyal service and could hold positions of significant "power".
Though clearly not the power of self determination, if they had a power to influence the king, they had it in the context of a loss of personal freedom, since they where essentially enslaved.
The Eunucs are mentioned 11 times in the book of Esther. Esthers relationship to the Eunucs shifts dramatically between chapter 2 and 4. In chapter 2 the Eunuchs are described as being 'in charge' of 'the kings women' but by chapter 4 they are being described as 'her Eunuchs'. In most other verses they are described as the king's so Esther's transition to Queen gives her derived power over the Eunics though I imagine it would be shaky and dependent on continued favour with the king.
Anyway the Eunuchs are in most places described as belonging to someone. They have become possessions. Eunuchs I guess where the ancient worlds answer to the question who will guard the women? It cannot be women because we cannot give them authority or power, nor can it be men because we cannot trust them not to be craving our own position of power and influence, and we cannot trust them not to rape and pillage, and any offspring must be ours.
So we will violate a man so that he is able to serve our purposes because he is now a non-person and no longer a threat.
Interestingly Xerxes assassination was assisted by a Eunuch - and we read about an attempt in the book of Esther also.
Not all men do that well in patriarchy.
There is so much stuff about masculinities floating around the Christian world, it breaks my heart to see gender non-conforming men being silenced as not Christian or "real men" because they don't like mountain climbing or whatever other way people have decided men NEED to demonstrate their masculinity. The kingdom of heaven turns everything on it's head.
Isaiah 54:4-5 says:
For thus says the Lord,
Sexual Violence is never ok. And the fact that we find it funny, and don't even see it as violence when the victims of the crime are men is deeply disturbing and evidence of the ubiquitous patriarchy that surrounds us.
No comments:
Post a Comment