23.

I feel a lot of things today but I don't feel much like going into details until I have a conversation with my boyfriend. I am making plans to start my four week gluten-free life and I'm not sure if I should post about it here or make a side blog. I think I will feel better if I can just post some things on here and remember to post daily even if I have a lot to do. I go back to school to start work on the third and I'll begin chronicling my new dietary changes then.

22.

Unpopular Opinion after the jump.



People are so unwilling to critique their religious beliefs. They are willing to accept that you can critique without mocking, yet they refuse to do it. No one questions the church and everyone constantly makes excuses for it. They mirror the very complaints they have about whites, homophobes, etc. saying things like "Well not all Christians are like that" to shut down valid critiques and questions. Our communities have a sickness, which isn't Christianity but a widely permeating fear of questioning it. I don't want to question something so fallible that a mere critique and questioning of the harmful parts of it will cause my belief system to crumble. I'm not sure how others do it. Yet we are supposed to believe that it's not brainwashing, but teaching. I've been taught many things that I continue to question and adapt my beliefs about. If you are truly "taught" and not brainwashed, shouldn't you be able to do the same? 

Christianity & The Church Within St. Lucia

Religious institutions in St. Lucia are a powerful political force that transcends personal beliefs and community organization. Within St. Lucia, Christianity was implemented by colonizers for specific reasons. Is it believable that people who raped, destroyed and enslaved really cared that their slaves were saved by God? Is it plausible that Christianity was spread throughout the Caribbean to "save" the very people that colonizers were attempting to control and enslave? It seems unlikely that Christian missionaries were interested in spreading goodness and truth and more interested in creating a system of power that would force subservience among specific groups of people, stamping out their traditions and cultures, convincing them of their evil and making them more pliable for the intentions of slave masters and colonizers.

Regardless of the malicious intent of our colonizers, they were successful in their spread of religion throughout the Caribbean. Although most countries in the Caribbean are sovereign nations, colonial mindsets remain prevalent. In St. Lucia, religion is greater than a set of personal beliefs and individual's practices. Religious beliefs are used through religious institutions in exacting social control and maintaining power over underprivileged groups of people (including women and the poor). From birth to death, religion is a controlling force in every day life and through this control which can range from the seemingly harmless to the openly violent, societal problems are obscured. Large scale religious institution as a replacement for smaller scale, community based religious gathering hinders progress.

In St. Lucia, a child's relationship with religion begins from the time they are born*. Baptism is seen as a requirement regardless of the level of parental devotion to a particular faith and only two generations ago, parents were forced to choose Catholic names for their children. For example, when my grandmother was born, her parents wanted to call her Morella, but were forced to put "Catherine" on her birth certificate by priests. These early influences in religious indoctrination may seem innocuous. It is possible to argue that things like baptism and name changes are not legally enforced, but it would be ignorant to disregard the powerful effects of societal pressure in St. Lucia, where our culture considers adhering to a particular standard and tradition to be valuable. This early induction into a church (predominantly the Catholic church) serves as an initiation into a system that flourishes on the oppression of others and on exercising social control for the benefit of those who support abusive patriarchal values and wish to continue a destructive status quo.

For young children, schools are one of the primary locations where religious control is ensured. Regardless of your parents' faith, you will be exposed to Christianity in schools and be forced to comply. Exposure to Christianity is not an exposure to the Christian ethics of kindness and love but rather an exposure to a system that values dominance and violence if specific behaviors are not performed. School becomes a Skinner box where performance of  learned behavior is emphasized and punishment is frequent and violent. Educating students about religion and Christian ethics is not the reality of early Christian education. Children who have only recently learned to talk are forced to pray words that they do not understand the depth of; prayers become mindless while performance is the focus.

During prayer, the punishment for non-compliance is a beating. The difference between beating and spanking is important. A spanking is supposed to cause enough pain to be a deterrent whereas beatings are excessive. Within public schools, students are beat with 1-2 inch thick wooden sticks between a foot or a foot and a half long. Often times, these sticks are broken in half or splintered on the backs of disobedient students, from as young as five years old. We have not moved forward from the same punishments West Indian slave masters used to force compliance from their slaves.

This sort of punishment can be "earned" from either perceives or actual non-compliance during prayer; it doesn't necessarily have to be disruptive. Students who were not totally silent, didn't clasp their hands properly or didn't close their eyes were often subject to this punishment. Sometimes, entire classes of students were subject to beatings if more than one student did not comply. Teachers often cited the popular phrase "Peter pays for Paul"; it is not coincidence that Peter and Paul are important figures within Christianity. By using violence not just in all facets of producing obedience, but in religious obedience, an association whether conscious or not is founded between violence and religion (specifically disobedience from a religious tradition will result in a violent reaction).

Prayer occurs at least three times a day. The recitation of prayers and prostration before God is seen as one of the most valuable aspects of a child's development within our school systems. It is unfair to deny the value of spirituality, but the public education system leaves no room for children of other faiths. Although these people are in the minority, should they be forced to abandon the traditions of their parents and families? Who does this benefit? The only Muslim child who I went to school with in primary school was forced to participate in Christian prayers, likely facing violent punishment or at the very least humiliation if he did not comply. This student left the school after only a year.

The use of religion and violence to exert control is reminiscent of what Caribbean colonizers did to the slaves and Amerindians under their control. In children however, the damage in reinforced throughout generations; no one seeks to modify our attitude with regards to children and we keep rehashing the same catchphrases regarding the discipline of our children. A common one is "Spare the rod and spoil the child".

Violence is effective at producing obedient behavior. Throughout early childhood and even afterwards, fear is a motivating factor in religious behavior and may eventually influence powerful religious beliefs. Children and eventually adults grow to believe that straying from what is perceived as "righteousness" is understandably met with violence. How can this message be true to a faith that (theoretically) preaches kindness and love above all else? Fear is a tool of control, not one that promotes love or positive growth.

Early in childhood, the importance of religious performance is extended from school to family life. In Catholic families, first communions are expected to take place when a child is between six and ten years old. Pressure to confirm your faith follows soon after; many confirmations take place when a child is between eleven and fourteen years old. Once a child is between eight and ten years old and older gender separation under the guise of "religious" ethics and proper behavior begins. There are different sets of behavior that are deemed correct according to religious leaders as well as other public figures who openly incorporate so-called Christian views into the ethics that they preach, but may not necessarily practice.

Girls are initiated into the role of sexual objects and boys are initiated into a cult of patriarchal masculinity where deference from female members of society is expected, respectable and in extreme cases justifiably punishable by violence. From a young age, women are told that dressing a certain way is inappropriate. People use words like "skettel" and "twi hal" to describe women who dress a particular way and female children internalize these concepts regarding what is respectable and what is not. Objectification is disguised as protection. By telling girls that dressing a certain way makes them either more or less sexually available for abuse, this reduces their clothing choices to choices rightfully subjected to the male gaze and to the behavior of rapists and other deviants. Predators have no responsibility here; blame is thrust upon girls who have either just entered puberty or are just about to. This is what we are taught is right.

This may not seem connected to religious institutions on the surface, but "respectability" is tied into Christian ethics. In a society with widespread Christian institutions, morality of any kind doesn't exist independently from the church.

Young boys have a different experience in their pre-pubescent and pubescent years. Instead of becoming sexual objects, their authority and superiority begin to be reaffirmed through religious patriarchal values and participation in patriarchal rituals. Families deeply involved in churches encourage involvement in the church through becoming altar boys or joining choirs. Church is a place where boys are expected to interact with the opposite gender, although girls interacting with boys is not encouraged. The ethics of respectability that are implemented on girls are non-existent for boys. Masculinity and patriarchal thinking is established via religion; the religious narrative is one where only the voices of men are significant.

Gender dominance is established through the structure of the church. Male priests and pastors are the dominant voices and control the behavior and beliefs of all their constituents. Even in churches with nuns, the nuns are clearly deferent to the male authority figures. Women are often supportive figures, working behind the scenes and sub-ordinate to male counterparts. This affects young, observant children who will then see the policing of women's behavior as natural and righteous. They begin to see a woman's unwavering obedience as expected and a lack of subservience is justifiably punishable by violence.

Women and men both serve to enforce "church patriarchy" within their homes; the practices become cultural and not just religious. We are falsely led to believe that this is all our culture entails. Girls are made to serve their male siblings and held to more rigid standards of behavior with emphasis on household duties, sociability with family members and child care. Boys may participate in household chores but are more often encouraged in activities aside from cooking and childcare such as yard work or household maintenance. It is foolish to think that this family structure is independent of religion as the values are clearly enforced by those who claim to preach the word of God and whose behavioral ethics are intertwined with Christianity.

If childhood experiences connecting to adulthood feels like a stretch because you somehow doubt young children to be absorptive or impressionable, rest assured that religious institutional practices are present and influential in the lives of teenagers. The two top performing secondary schools on the island are both Roman Catholic. Choosing Non-Catholic options doesn't eliminate the influence of religion - the influence is merely a non-specific Christian influence. To expand upon the educational options if you doubt the lack of separation between Christianity and education, I'll describe the best options for education if you place value on your child's secondary education.

Besides the two Catholic schools which are considered the best through reputation and CXC results, there is the International School, Leon Hess Secondary School and Castries Comprehensive Secondary School. The international school costs upwards of $13,000 per semester, and is known for housing spoiled children of expatriates and locals with excessive wealth. Leon Hess is co-educational and not preferred by most families who are interested in "protecting" their young girls from being around teenage boys; the educational standard is considered slightly lower than the Catholic secondary schools. Castries Comprehensive is also considered to have a slightly lower educational quality and is again co-educational.  These "reputations" may not be based in truth, but they still affect decision making processes of families making choices for where their children attend secondary school.

In secondary schools, regardless of denomination, prayer is constant and there is no opting out of it. There is a minimum of three prayers a day. A good education is incomplete without being forced into a religious practice which may not become genuine belief but conditions behavior that one believes to be "good". This is not questioned despite any apparent logical contradictions. With a so-called religious education, you would expect most, if not all students to emerge with a strong sense of ethics and critical thinking skills complementary to faith as opposed to contradictory. The reality is different from the theory because a commitment to Christian ethics is non-existent. There is a commitment to the institution of Christianity which has a destructive force because the power of spirituality is harnessed for social control.

Many of the school rules at the leading girls-only secondary school focus on appearance. The appearance of chastity and purity is the focus of the school's rules with a disproportionate number dedicated to policing appearance. Punishments are swift and frequent, disciplinary notes range in color and severity; although most punishments are not placed on the permanent record, the effects of receiving punishment are typically enough of a deterrent. Being punished frequently often means being labelled as a troublemaker by teachers; this may eventually lead to teachers being less willing to write recommendations for a student. Students at this school receive far more frequent punishments than students at the boys-only counterpart.

The focus on appearances is sadly, not unique to the secondary school experience. From childhood, the appearance of devotion has been valued more than actual devotion; this is extrapolated to a high school setting where the fixation on appearance becomes more literal. The policing of girls' appearances is an extension of Christian ethics. Being abstinent from sexual activity until marriage and ensuring that you don't tempt men before then are  both considered important within a Christian society; having a chaste appearance is a method that this abstinence is safe-guarded. Occasionally this commitment to chaste appearance is disguised (or maybe genuinely perceived) as an interest in protecting girls. How is suppression, blaming and shaming girls between the ages of eleven and sixteen also seen as ethical, necessary and even helpful? Within a patriarchal society reliant on Christian institution for validation, this attention to women's behavior is attributed to logic and men's behavior is attributed to "human nature".

In a boy's adolescent environment, the rules are a lot different. Boys are almost expected to come home with their collars off center and shirts untucked. Discipline in a male environment is an extension of the violence they experienced in primary school; boys who are too flagrant about their disobedience of school rules are caned by the headmaster. This experience, for boys who have grown up beaten their whole lives, is seen as a status symbol rather than a punishment by the time they are in secondary school. Defiance may appear to have been punished, but it is in fact rewarded by granting them status within their social groups. Boys are rarely punished for establishing dominance over female teachers who are often powerless to punish them or do not see the purpose in doing so. One girl recounted her brother's experience where students threw plastic bottles at a female teacher as she taught. There were no consequences, and she merely continued to teach until becoming overwhelmed and just exiting the class. If the leniency of an all boys school is contrasted to the constant vigilance teachers have in all girls school, we can easily see how this would create problems in the future for both genders. Both have different expectations of how the world works and these expectations are the result of patriarchal values being attributed to righteousness and using the institution of Christianity to peddle these differences as human nature.

In young adults, the detriments of religious institution are more obvious, as well as the hypocrisy behind the alleged commitment to Christianity that is fostered early in their lives. The marriage rates in St. Lucia are some of the lowest in the world, yet children populate our schools. It's absurd to believe that all these children come from the few church sanctified relationships on the island. In a religion that believes that pre-martial sex and divorce is against God's law, looking at birth rates and marriage rates is the only proof you need to show that genuine commitment to God's law is rare especially in regards to sexual behavior. The number of murders and other petty crimes support this as well. Religion is used when necessary for social control and genuine practice is uncommon. 0.06% of 15-19 year old St. Lucian men are married, 0.02% of 20-24 year olds and 0.25% of 25-29 year olds according to 2001 census data (the most recent available on line). The statistics for older men are not much more promising; 5.07% is the highest rate in the entire set of statistical data. (x)

I focused on these age ranges because teen pregnancy is a well known and well cited social problem facing St. Lucians; major news sources as well as international studies on St. Lucia focus on the "very high" teen pregnancy rates. Are all these pregnancies the result of church sanctified marriages? If we have to look at government statistics, this can't possibly be the case. St. Lucian newspapers, preachers and pastors will neglect looking at the United States models for public health especially regarding birth control because they believe it is against the Catholic church. Pastors and priests have openly claimed that birth control white supremacist invention to lower the birth rates of black people. They preach bold-faced lies to their congregations. People still believe that the church is the solution to the problem of teen pregnancy although it has shown no allegiance to any such movement and demeans practices that have been demonstrated through reliable scientific research to be helpful in reduction of teen pregnancy rates.

While women's sexualities are constantly policed, their position in society diminished. Being diminutive and always saying yes to people in power is valued for women. Is it such a shock then that they find themselves unable to say no to predatory men who only seek their company for sex? Is it any wonder that they continue to trust people who don't care about their agency when they have been repeatedly told that their agency is unimportant compared to the appearance of chastity? Women are blamed for the actions of rapists and abusers. Women are taught that their biological urges are impure unless they are married when they see children born out of wedlock constantly and can see that those who they look up to are immoral scum. The church denies them agency, yet blames them for societal problems.

We can also examine the fact that many teen pregnancies are the result of incest and rape. People will admit that these two things are huge problems here, yet no data currently exists with these statistics. Due to the taboo nature of these two, victims are left without recourse unless the rapes can be used to further the political (and sometimes personal) agenda of those in power. Rape cases are occasionally sensationalized to control women's behavior, reminding them that they are constantly in danger of an unknown rapist. I'm not suggesting that the danger isn't real, but there is a specific reason that these cases are the focus of the public eye as opposed to the frequently occurring rapes and incests that happen in secret.

No one tells their child to beware of their uncles or fathers or family friends who statistically would provide a greater danger, suggesting that the concern - consciously or unconsciously - is not about preserving safety but preserving a status quo. This regard to status quo is not independent of existing in a society where religion is the primary way social control is exerted. Regardless of personal beliefs, social and cultural mores that stem from religious institutions become internalized; the result is widespread denial of agency and misplaced blame.

With people who have moved out of "young adulthood" into "adulthood" and begin to have children, the emphasis on the value of men that has been bred into our culture early on in life is maintained. Parents are encouraged to have more children, and are seen as odd if they don't keep trying until they get a boy. Going around the island with my parents to visit different family members and family friends through out my life, my parents were asked on numerous occasions if the "didn't want a boy" or "didn't have a boy yet".

There is a huge emphasis on raising children within the church - baptism, first communions and confirmations are arranged without question because they are all seen as "something people do". Religion is indoctrinated since birth by those who are faithful and even those who can occasionally be forced to admit that they are not true believers. There is no way to question Christianity. There is no critical analysis, merely blind belief. Parents were once taught that "spar[ing] the rod will spoil the child" and perpetuate the violence they experienced as children. In fact, almost all that they were indoctrinated with as children continues into adulthood. It is anti-religious and satanic to question God; the ills of society are seen and taught as the will of God. We perpetuate our own colonization even without the presence of masters. There is no room for other religious beliefs which are mocked openly as well as subtly.

Criticism of Christianity in it's function as an institutional power within St. Lucia isn't inherently anti-Christian, atheistic or an imposition of imperialistic values. Social issues that all humans can agree are negative - teen pregnancy, rape and incest for example - are perpetrated in situations where men are given all power over human sexuality. Religious institution forces spirituality and religion to be associated with dominance, fear, threat and a method of having power over other human beings.

Humanity's drive to find peace with our place in the universe and with the possible existence of a greater power - God, science, a polytheistic pantheon - can hardly be accomplished under conditions where fear and power exist and are constantly perpetrated. Additionally, the belief in religious freedom is not an imposition of Western values as much as it is a belief in equality and a belief that people should be able to question God and choose whether or not to ally themselves with the practices of the church. It is evident that allegiance to the church is not allegiance to perfect or at times even remotely Christian behavior.

How is this all really negative, and can't these problems be critiqued and solved without questioning or counteracting the church (as an institution)? The church is inextricable from society and culture in St. Lucia. It is heavily involved with every aspect of life, as I hopefully have demonstrated above. Men are given all power over sexuality via church patriarchy and social issues like rape, incest, child abuse, domestic violence and teen pregnancy are all prevalent within the culture of church patriarchy. Religion is intertwined with dominance and violence and used as a way to exert power over people en masse; this of course was the intended use of religion in the West Indies by colonizers seeking to find ways to control their slaves.

A critique of religious institution in a country predominantly made up of people of color is also not a racist condemnation of their cultural practices, although it can easily be transformed into one without sound analysis. This is not an imposition of colonialist ideas of curing non-white savagery, but rather an attempt to assess how St. Lucia can begin to decolonize how we think about societal issues.

St. Lucia's population is 54% female according to most recently available census data. West Indian women have been historically anti-patriarchal. It is culturally embedded within West Indian women to fight against injustices thrust upon us; within the church this aspect of our nature is suppressed. In the past, St. Lucian women have consistently fought against gendered wage gaps, led marooned slave colonies and spoken out again sexism through Calypso music. It is clear that the roots of anti-patriarchal thinking are there, but church ideology and it's widespread social control prevent these instincts from actualization especially today when more and more people are retreating to the church for solutions to society's ills. Women are deprived of bodily autonomy, their basic rights and the awareness that something is wrong within our society that they have the power to fix.

Our culture is greater than Christianity. Our traditions and social beliefs do not need to be totally lost in an examination of what constitutes social power and how we can seek to improve our society post-independence from Great Britain. Recognizing the connection between the way religion is used by people in power so that issues like incest, rape, sexual assault and child abuse can be brushed under the rug for the sake of appearing moral or by using the justification of "God's will" is not a condemnation of our entire culture. Within St. Lucia, we need to examine the way religion is used to terrorize us through dominance and violence for us to have any real progress with eliminating our social ills. Thus far, the typical complacency with regards to social ills seems to be ineffective. Using God as an excuse for this complacency is not going to suffice if we truly desire change independent from major Western powers. Relying on Americans, the British or Asian powers will not work for us.

Condemning a belief in God and a removal of religion as many radical atheists would advocate is also not a practical solution to what is happening within St. Lucia. It is more important to differentiate between religious institutions - which to me represents the church as the primary method of social control and organization - and religion as a personal system of beliefs and a small scale method of community organization. Whereas religious institutions require turning towards a male leader (or a patriarchal minded female leader in rare occasions) for all understanding of Christian ethics and morals, churches should be a place where active engagement with scripture and a personal and individualized approach to God's teachings is encouraged.

There should not be only one way to follow God; in an ideal situation, Christianity would be tailored to the individual who would then share some of their beliefs, but maybe not all of them, with a larger congregation. Conformity to what a pastor or priest believes is the correct interpretation of the scripture means that no one asks questions. Parishioners are not encouraged to actively engage with what they believe but rather to accept whatever male leaders dictate is correct. How can you have true belief if you don't constantly grapple with what your belief means or actively engage with your spirituality? If you must suppress all other spiritual differences for yours to remain powerful, isn't that a demonstration of the weakness of your beliefs?

True resolution to our social problems can only come from decoupling politics - sexual politics, government etc. - from religious beliefs. This doesn't mean abandoning Christianity, but rather preventing a myopic view of morality from obscuring our vision of a better St. Lucia in the future. Christian morality  today cannot realistically reflect the same values it did at it's inception. Scholars and people in power in the church should be engaging with scriptures to provide a modern interpretation that fits within the context of our world today.

A place where the majority of child bearing citizens are not married cannot claim to have the same views on sexual morality as the Bible originally intended. The New Testament condemns divorce, yet we live in a nation not only of unmarried people, but in a nation filled with adulterers. Some of these adulterers sit in the front pews of the church.

Religious leaders need to take on a more positive role in communities. Instead of using their power to enact domination and violence, religious leaders or leaders who encompass religion as a huge part of their public personae should be encouraged to analyze scriptures with a critical mind and modify their understanding of the Bible to reflect an updated Christian morality that doesn't necessarily depart from the Bible, but certainly leaves behind the normalized violence that is rampant throughout our region.

Many religious leaders will likely argue that going back to church will solve the problems plaguing the youth. How can this be true when three generations of church goers (and likely more) continue to be plagued by ills that were around long before today's youth? We need to reflect on who carries the power in our society and what they intend to do with that power. Beliefs that are made "stronger" through violence and suppression of non-conformist thought should come into question. We will only see progress when we genuinely reflect on what controls our society and behavior instead of concocting new external evils or rehashing now irrelevant evils to place the blame on.

* A relationship with religion is not a relationship with God.

21.

Thinking about the future only stresses me out. I don't need that much time  alone. I don't need the much time to think. Loneliness can be good but I've had plenty. 

I'm picturing myself in a beautiful dress, alone in a beach house surrounded by things - loving nothing but memories. 

I picture myself traveling the world and always having to sit alone on airplanes, wondering if I will ever meet the love of my life.