[Disclaimer: the voice is not affected.]
She, walking so smooth
up
to the pulpit.
She, sliding so smooth
in
to awareness.
She, the target
(of every eye)
(of fluttering hearts)
(of surely crushing thoughts).
Her conscious choices augment (bloodflush lipstick black black eyes) her sexual attributes (thewaist thebreasts theheight thehair thepout theneck covered to see) and she sways her way to the front.
She, filling our hearts
with
envy or lust.
She, loving us all
for
loving her.
But--and the silence beckons us--her voice parts her lips and welcomes itself into the room. Breath. The only description for the crowd: holding it. Breath. The only description for her voice.
Her voice is all breath and moan, silvery smooth, sex and ice. It, slippery, slides to me and whets me.
The women all want
to be her.
The men all want
to have her.
If we deny it, we're lying. Her voice has us under her spell
filth in a holy place, sex in a sanctuary, flesh incorporeal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I like "her voice parts her lips and welcomes itself into the room" and such.
ReplyDeleteIn general, though, reading this is like hugging a termite mound.
Also, I am not lying when I say that I would not want to be the woman who brings profanity to a holy place. I'm not that desperate.
Well, it's a classic image of women: either Mary or the whore. No middle ground.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that sometimes, the hurtful misogynist imagery actually fits. At that point, what do we do with the woman who plays the harlot? Do we let them into church? Do we dress them like a virgin and ask everyone to turn a blind eye?
Robby, "that hurtful misogynist imagery" is never appropriate.
ReplyDeleteLet me break down what your comment has implied.
1. Women are defined by (and have their worth in) sex.
2. Women who are sexually uninhibited should not be allowed in church.
3. We (what, men?) are expected/required to dress women, make excuses for them, and pretend they are innocent whether or not they aren't.
4. Traditional/classic ways of thinking do not need to be (should not be?) challenged.
5. Women can only be perfect or sinful.
Does it sound like I'm making this into a bigger deal than it is? Do you think I'm reading too much into what you're saying?
Probably. I probably am. But I keep hearing this sort of thing from both men and women, and I think it is wrong. It makes the speaker sound like s/he has bought into the rape culture mindset that women have never quite been able to escape.
I ask you, what did Jesus do when he met a . . . woman who fit the archetypal hurtful misogynist imagery? Did He rush to the nearest market and buy her clothes before he would speak to her? Did He tell her to come back when she'd gotten her life together? Did He turn to the crowd watching her and make excuses for the way she was dressed or for what they caught her doing? Did He try to pass her off as a virgin?
How would the situation have changed if she had been a man?
Ok please don't take back your words but please notice my point: if you define yourself by other people's standards, then by default, their standards are accurate. Not good or right, but accurate. If she defines herself by the subtle madonna/whore mentality that still pervades our culture, then the hurtful misogynist imagery fits.
ReplyDeleteNow again, I know you're angry about it, but here's the thing: I can accept that she's up front and talking and that she tries to gussy herself to come to church and I don't care. I don't think many of the other people do. What I am suggesting is that she should care, and she should care very much what message she's sending God by taking every day as an opportunity to be sexual.
What I'm saying is that sex is a weapon and if you shoot people you probably aren't a good person. It's not fair, but it's the system sin worked out for us and I guess we'd better deal with it. Men need to keep it in their pants and women need to keep it in their blouses. And both parties need to stop shifting responsibility onto the other.
I feel like you posted this the way some people would talk a horse out of killing everything.
ReplyDeleteThe thing is, though, that whatever image a person accepts for him or herself, whatever image society tries to stuff them into, that is not the way Jesus defines that person.
So sure, you can call it accurate, if you want. She probably believes it. Society probably believes it. You'll definitely be socially astute.
But you'll still be wrong. Because the only definitions that matter are God's, and I'm quite sure you're going to think, how can Janelle say this when she so clearly doesn't believe it for herself, but I say again, God doesn't define women based on the madonna/whore (false) dichotomy.
I stand by what I said in my first comment, about her bringing things that are profane to a holy place and about not wanting to be her. And you know what, I spent several hours yesterday trying to reconcile how I would deal with things if I were the person who asked her to present. I'm not satisfied with any of my answers, but I guess the way it ended was that I decided that I would stand by her.
Sex is a weapon, yes, and yes, men and women need to be more thoughtful of each other than they are. However, whatever bad behavior or thoughts a man commits when faced with a beautiful/overtly sexual woman are his responsibility, not hers. (Just as her clothing choices are her responsibility, not his.) We always have a choice. How many rapists should have been pardoned because the woman "was asking for it"?
All she did was expose everyone's ugliness. She didn't plant it there.
There are so many verses I want to quote at you.
I'm not angry, though. I never was.
ReplyDeleteIf you wanted to know.
Basically, this is a conversation with tremendous potential to injure someone. But until humanity figures out a healthier view of sex, we will remain thus.
ReplyDeleteSorry, dear.
ReplyDeleteI had hoped you wouldn't give up on this, but I understand why you would.
I love when you write poetry because of all the times you have hated poems. HA! And you can try and tell me that stuff isn't poetry but I am a poet (albeit a very poor one and not prolific) and I know it when I smell it.
ReplyDeleteOn that note, the use of the word "whet" is genius here. I commend you.
I re-read all this stuff.
ReplyDeleteWe don't allow pedophiles within a thousand yards of a school or a playground, nor do we allow batterers to contact their wives.
Where is the line drawn on prevention? Should we legislate people's dress and behavior to prevent crime? No, I don't think so. That doesn't feel right. But we still do it. We lock away people who committed a single crime like somehow it's okay to prevent the next one by putting them in a box. I'm not sure where the line is, because between bulgy man pants and murder there's just one light-year long gradient, and I'm not sure where we decide we've gone from white to black.
Anyway, I didn't give up, Janelle. I just recognized that what I was saying was never going to make anyone feel good. Why say it? If you don't have anything nice, and whatnot.
Listen; I doubt very much that the girl in the post defines herself as whore, but she does very much value her sexuality. I think that's all. And I don't care too much for that in church. I'm not a good Christian, and I fall in this place myself, but if you value anything over God, especially in his house, you're doing it wrong. That's sort of what Jesus was trying to say to the RYRuler, I think. Stop valuing things over me.