The Superman Epidemic: A Feminist Reading

Will analyze Eminem's "Superman", the Superman comic books, and the Spider Man film franchise - and what it says about the male-female dynamic in relation to Christianity.

Apocalyptic Movies

you know

Thoughts on Abortion

 

"Am I going to hell if I have an abortion?"

So. After watching the episode of Friday Night Lights in Professor Harris' lecture on abortion, I was struck with two thoughts: first, Tim Riggins is incredibly sexy (though I already knew this as I am an FNL fanatic) and second, our obsession with teenage - or "underage" - abortion is extremely puzzling.

I understand that Becki is only a sophomore in high school (grade ten? do the math - fifteen years old) and being knocked up so young isn't the greatest position to find yourself in. I understand that it's particularly shameful in such a small Christian town as Dillon, Texas, though any community, city, town, or otherwise would likely have the same reaction. I understand teen pregnancy is one of the greatest fears for any mother or father. I get that it's looked down upon in our society but to be frank, I think our dependence on abortion and the frenzy over rising levels of teen pregnancy reflect far more an issue with society than with our youth, the media that affects them, or any other external factors.

Biologically, women are built for pregnancy in their teenage years. According to our biological clocks we are supposed to be getting pregnant and bearing children during our teenage years. Males and females alike are raging with hormones during these years and, in fact, these are the years we produce the healthiest children. How can you possibly blame teens for having sex? And consequently, how can you possibly blame them for getting pregnant?

Oh, no, no, my mistake - we aren't blaming teenage girls for getting pregnant - we're blaming them for having abortions. The set-up of our society sets them up for failure - and then blames them for choosing the alternative. In condemning abortions, we are indeed absolutely blaming young women for getting pregnant. We are judging them, criticizing them, making them feel as though they are wrong and stupid and naive for having got "knocked up" - no of course you can't have an abortion - that's wrong - you shouldn't have been having sex so young - now you have to deal with the consequences of your actions! Read between the lines of  pro-lifer material and the Pope's statements on abortion and that is exactly the message.


The effects of this are wrong on a number of levels. We are making girls feel shame about something natural. Pregnancy at a young age was glorified in past eras; today it is mocked, ridiculed, shamed, swept under the carpet and hidden behind closed doors. With that kind of condescending attitude towards teen pregnancy, abortion presents itself as the only viable option. Not only are we talking about the attitudes of parents, friends, neighbors, boyfriend, peers, teachers, society as a whole, but we are also talking about future. Even if a girl was strong enough to deal with the emotional abuse that comes with learning of teen pregnancy (look at Becki's mom - essentially all she said was "You're an idiot.") she then has to think about her options in terms of education and career. How can she raise a child when she's sixteen years old? Unless she has full financial and emotional support from her family, the future looks pretty grim. High schools, universities, and colleges are not adequately equipped to deal with teenage mothers. Job opportunities die quick deaths when a newborn or toddler is involved, as does any hope of moving up in the world financially. Children will obviously drain your bank account and when the bank isn't stacked to begin with, teenage mothers are looking at a life of struggling simply to stay afloat.

You want to lessen abortion and thus save the lives of millions of fetuses? Try looking at the patriarchal system currently in place. Entirely set up by men for men, Western society is built on a timeline that clashes completely with the female biological cycle. The issue is not with abortion, nor is it with teen pregnancy. A much deeper issue is brewing underneath the surface, and perhaps if we focused on that then abortion and teen pregnancy would lessen considerably. Perhaps we should set things up in a way that produces healthy babies and healthy mothers, and this would include younger mothers and "youth" pregnancy. Day-cares, jobs, universities etc should be built around this clock rather than an unrealistic and male-based one we currently operate on.

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus: A Reflection on God, Abortion, and the Fear of Death

BANKSY and the Relationship Between Religion and Popular Culture

Many of you will be familiar with the elusive street artist who goes by the name of Banksy. Nominated for Best Documentary for Exit Through the Gift Shop at this year's Academy Awards (though he lost to Inside Job) and internationally notorious for his street art, Banksy's work epitomizes the crumbling relationship between Christianity and contemporary Western society. His work critiques the place of Christianity and religion in modern society and thus falls squarely into Gordon Lynch's first category of "Studying Religion in Relation to Everyday Life". Lynch splits this category into three chief areas, the second of which he describes as "considering how religion is represented in wider forms of popular culture." (Lynch, 23) This blog entry is devoted to analyzing Banksy's social commentary on Christianity through of a few examples of his work.

The above image is a clear response to the faltering influence of Christianity in a technologically dominated society. This image is positively loaded with messages about Christianity and religion in general. If we look at Google as being representative of technology and technology as a representative of science, and we compare this to Jesus as a symbol of religion, we see the ultimate clash between science and religion.

Here Jesus himself admits he does not have the answers - "Try Google," he says, and in this we see religion defer to science. We see a critique of faith in today's society. Who looks to the Bible, the Church, your local pastor in response to a question, conflict, or issue? Very few - instead we flip open the Mac and Google or Wikipedia the answers to moral issues and questions of faith alike. Google represents the all-knowing and all-powerful influence in our society, the father figure and friend alike. Who helps us as students with our assignments? Is it prayer to God that got us through that test or was it that hour we spent googling and researching via the internet? Contemporary society is so technologically focused that we have lost our faith in the former all-knowing, comforting father figure of Jesus Christ and God. Here Banksy mocks the fall of Christian influence to our science-based society. I choose to believe his mockery is satirical, meant not to ridicule the Christian faith but to prompt us to question and examine the overarching influences we subscribe to.

With relation to Lynch, it is clear that forms of popular culture like street art often represent religion in a negative light. Here popular culture represents religion as outdated and having lost touch with the times. Sure, it's a negative message - but critiques like Banksy's are beneficial to religion in that they keep it relevant. The fact that Banksy is utilizing traditional images of Jesus on the cross, a white dove, Mother Mary and baby Jesus - that serves to remind people of the transition our culture has gone through with respect to Christianity. It serves as a medium of reflection and in offending devout Catholics, it brings the issue of religion in modern society back to the forefront of public debate.

Controversial work like Banksy's is often underrated in how it helps exactly what it is critiquing: in calling out religion's failure to integrate into a technologically driven society, perhaps Banksy is calling for its defense. Perhaps it is an attempt to motivate the Catholic Church to respond and retaliate. Perhaps it is an attempt to motivate society as a whole to analyze their views on religion and particularly their hypocrisy when it comes to action vs. words and empty faith. As Lynch notes, "Analyzing how religion is represented in contemporary media is not therefore simply a case of describing these representations. Rather it involves asking what these representations may tell us about wider biases, values, and concerns in contemporary society..." (Lynch, 24) Indeed, the Banksy images serve as a basis on which to evaluate religion's place in today's society. The above image suggests we value technology more than faith, and that perhaps many are concerned about society's move away from faith, morality, and Christianity to a culture that instead focuses on Google, Jersey Shore, and BBM.

The image to the right depicts Jesus's crucifixion - yet in Banksy's portrayal we see Jesus in a Bristol City football jersey, with the stenciled word "RELIGION" below him. This relates very much to Tracy Trothen's article on sports having replaced Christianity as a modern form of 'religion' in contemporary society.

Football (soccer, footy, whatever you want to call it) is a worldwide phenomenon that brings people together based on city, nation, and team. We see during the World Cup Little Italy in Toronto come together for Azzuri, and Little Portugal at St. Clair go insane when Portugal wins a game. German fans all over Toronto united to celebrate how far the German team went in last summer's World Cup, as did fans of Oranje. Africans screamed Bafana Bafana for their boys on the pitch and tears of joy were shed throughout Madrid when Spain emerged victorious. Banksy's interpretation of Jesus in a Bristol City jersey comments on modern society's obsession with sport and its similarities of rituals and togetherness that mirror what Christianity used to be to society.

http://www.blogger.com/profile/09071845681087537283

Religion and Fashion: The Rosary and the Crucifix as Fashion Accessories

From tattoos to jewelry, religious symbols have become relevant in modern culture as little more than fashion accessories. From ink on the backs of Jersey Shore idiots to pieces in Marc Jacobs' latest show, the rosary and the crucifix in particular have become cult favorites in the fashion industry.

Drugs, Depression, and Religion

Watch this commercial for Abilify, an anti-depressant now on the market. I will relate this to Christianity shortly.

Also note, once again, the inherent sexism in our society. A woman struggling with depression - a man to save her. A man as a doctor as a doctor is a professional sitting at the top of the hierarchy in the working world.

The White Minority and What it Means

Really interesting article found on CNN: "Are White Racially Oppressed?"

Before you scoff and cower in fear at the thought of racism rearing its ugly head in America (again), read the article. Obviously I am not a white supremacist in any way, shape, or form and in no way am I saying I hold these views as my own - but the article is thought-provoking and interesting.

Comments as to how this relates to Christianity - particularly in America - and diversity of both race and religion will follow shortly.


http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/12/21/white.persecution/?hpt=T2

GAGA and GOD

Lady Gaga - also known as Mother Monster - has been born and born this way....baby. Her new video

Adam vs. Eve: Does Christianity Promote Sexism?

The above is the director's cut for Swedish DJ Tim Berg's single "Seek Bromance". While I love Avicii, I am not a fan of this video. First, notice a few examples of outright but culturally accepted sexism:

1. It is the boy's father who assumes the dominant role and kicks him out of the house. He is seen as large and menacing, an authoritative figure. The video would not have the same effect had it been his mother telling him to leave. The only other authoritative figure in the video is the security guard kicking them out of the casino and he, too, is male. 

2. The girl is always in the back of the car. Even when there are only two people in the car at the start of the video, she is delegated to the backseat. The other boy automatically assumes the front seat. Further, though both males take turns at the wheel, she is never given that responsibility.

3. When the car dies, it is only the two males who look under the hood. It is accepted that girls know nothing about mechanics and cars.

4. Though it's most obvious at the end, the boys gang up on the girl throughout the video. They put whipped cream on her face and leave her to pay for the milkshakes; they take what appears to be her underwear and she is forced to chase them to get it back; they almost ditch her when she goes to the washroom; and finally, they together take advantage of her when she is drunk at the end of the night. Though the first few examples may seem playful and harmless, flirting even, when she is ditched at the end of the video it is evident that it was not all just fun and games after all. (At least not for her..)

If Trothen can argue that Christianity's atonement theories have embedded normative cultural violence in professional sports like hockey, I think it's fair to argue that Christianity embeds sexist values in society. How?


1. God is always referred to as a male. He is traditionally depicted as an elderly (white) male.
2. The Son of God is also male.
3. The apostles were all male.
4. The Bible was thus written entirely by males.
5. Only males are allowed to be priests.
6. The 10 Commandments apply specifically to men (Do not covet thy neighbor's wife.)
7. Various passages of the Bible quite clearly assert male superiority to women, notably Ephesians 5: 22-25:  

5:22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ also is the head of the assembly, being himself the savior of the body.

5:24 But as the assembly is subject to Christ,
so let the wives also be to their own husbands in everything. 

Sexism in the scriptures is also evident in 1 Corinthians 14:33-35: "...As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."

and in 1 Timothy 2:11-12: "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.  I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." 

Christianity is quite clearly male centered and male dominated, both traditionally and in modern culture. The above passages blatantly assert male superiority: women are expected to be silent, gentle, and submissive, subject to their husbands. The word "subject", according to the Oxford Dictionary, means "a person or thing under the control or influence of another." The Church, then, is quite literally putting females in marriage under the control of their husbands. It further teaches them - demands of them - to be silent and ask questions only to their husband. Women become completely dependent on their husbands, shamed for independent action, thought and inquisitiveness. Hello? Read between the lines and this is an absolute invitation for domestic abuse.

The above are examples of explicit sexism in the Bible. The implicit sexism of Christianity is equally apparent, and arguably contributes to the sexist values rampant in current society. Traditional sexism in Christianity is easily found in various mediums of popular culture today. For instance, in ancient paintings, God is always depicted as male. As said above, he is almost always depicted as an elderly, powerful looking white male with a long white beard. (Association of the elderly with wisdom.) Today, God continues to be depicted as male. In the 2003 Jim Carrey flick Bruce Almighty, Morgan Freeman is given the role of God. Though as a black man he is racially divergent to the typical depiction of God, he is still a male and as such represents the sexist traditions of Christianity in modern culture.

NBC's (absolutely incredible) television show Friday Night Lights is an excellent bridge between Trothen's argument regarding religion and sport and my three-pronged argument regarding sport, religion, and sexism. 

For those of you unfamiliar with this fantastic little drama, Friday Night Lights is a show based on a high school football team in Dillon, Texas. In its initial seasons, FNL followed the Dillon Panthers in West Dillon, before the high school was split into two districts and Coach Eric Taylor was transferred to East Dillon High to coach the Lions. The show's season is basically coordinated with the Lions' football season, with the ultimate goal of course being to reach and win State. FNL follows its players on a personal level, too, giving an extremely realistic view of suburban, middle class America: "Friday Night Lights has never obtained a sizable audience; however, it has been a critical success, lauded for its realistic portrayal of Middle America and deep personal exploration of its central characters." On the surface, the show is about a high school football team working towards victory. In fact, however, the show probes some of the most sensitive and important issues facing contemporary Middle America.

The small town of Dillon, Texas is rooted in two things: God, and football. I am going to try to make sense on paper of what makes sense in my head.

Our first premise is that, as argued above, the Christian religion is inherently sexist. It follows that a town strongly rooted in the Christian tradition would have its inherently sexist values embedded in it. Thus, because of its Christian roots, the town of Dillon, Texas is a sexist town oriented towards men.

Our second premise is that, as argued by Trothen, sport is a modern religion. Sport is a culturally relevant form of religion that espouses various aspects of traditional Christianity. In Dillon, Texas, the townspeople attend Friday night games as they do service on Sundays. They are united in their love and adoration of the football team. They are united in their hatred of a loss, and in their dislike towards the opposing team. The team's star players - particularly the quarterback - are the town's heroes just as Jesus is the hero of Christianity. The heroes on all fronts are male.

Third, then, it follows that sexism in sport is accepted as a cultural norm because of the sexist values that Christianity has embedded into today's society, particularly in small extremely homogeneous towns like Dillon.

 Coach Eric Taylor has two daughters, Julie and Gracie-Bell. Julie was a freshman in high school in Season 1 of FNL, and by FNL's final season, she was navigating her first year of college. Julie slept with one of her TA's in her first semester of college and consequently, completely emotionally derailed. She left college to return home and a few episodes later, left to Chicago to chase down her former boyfriend - and former Panthers' QB - Matt Saracen. Evidently, Julie bounces from male to male, boyfriend to fizzled love interest and back again, unable to find security in independence. Any psychology textbook will tell you that girls like this have "daddy issues" - because they lacked sufficient love and attention from their fathers growing up, they look to love, sex, and romance to provide this for them.

The irony in Friday Night Lights is that Coach Eric Taylor is painted as a hero. He is the soul, strength, and backbone of the football team and as such, the heart of Dillon, Texas. He is portrayed as a man who loves his boys. He is loyal to his star QB Jason Street after Street's paralysis in Season One. He sees potential in Vince Howard, saves him from the streets and a future surely spent in jail, and trains him to be a star. He does not merely commodify Vince as a football player - he takes the young teen and transforms him from a violent, troublesome ghetto kid to a an honorable young man with a bright future. Vince has no father, and Coach becomes that figure for him, showing unwavering faith in him throughout his troubles. Similarly, Coach gives a moving and poignant speech for former fullback Tim Riggins when Riggins is seeking parole from jail. It is because of Coach's words that Riggins is released and following this, Coach makes an effort to ensure Riggins that he will provide him with anything he needs. Brotherhood between Coach and his football players is more than apparent, both on the field and off. Numerous scenes throughout FNL have Coach paying visits to players' homes to check up on them and ensure their well-being, or have players come in to Coach's office to get a firm but loving disciplinarian lecture. In return, the players have the utmost respect for Coach.

Yet Julie, Coach's actual child, receives none of this. Throughout the show, the relationship between father and daughter is good - it shows no outright problems or friction - but they are never shown to have as close of a relationship as Coach has with his players. When Julie is on the verge of emotional breakdown, Coach notices none of it. Every emotional lecture Julie is given come from Tami Taylor, her mother. Yet when Julie returns home from college in shame after her affair with the TA, Coach Taylor is disgusted with his daughter. He is furious, ashamed, upset. He blames her and he blames the TA. Nowhere is it even implied that he has any fault in the matter. He does not speak to Julie - even finding it difficult to look at her - for the majority of two episodes. The most ironic part? In being so upset with her and with her situation, Coach walks out of  a practice and considers skipping a game. Finally, he has a change of heart and speeds to the game, later than he's ever been, but on time. Everyone breathes a sigh of relief - Coach has not ditched his boys after all.

The sexism here is undeniable. Coach has never put his daughter before the team, even in a time of obvious need. The players are his sons far more than Julie is his daughter. This is accepted - encouraged, even - as a cultural norm. A town like Dillon would not be understanding had Coach missed games or practices here and there to spend time with his daughter. This is reflective of the Christian element embedded in Dillon, FNL, and Middle America: the boys are the heroes, so the boys come first.

Male superiority and male brotherhood has been embedded in American society by the Christian religion and furthered by the modern religion of male sports. It is evident in the scriptures, and equally so in popular culture like Friday Night Lights or the Tim Berg music video for "Seek Bromance".

**To further defeat Trothen's argument - as well as my own - we can ask why other popular North American sports - basketball, for instance - are not violent. Basketball and football are of a similar nature to hockey (moreso than sports like baseball); they have been just as exposed to Christianity and the atonement theories as hockey as; and they have to worry about money and viewership just as professional hockey does. Yet neither of these sports is nearly as violent is hockey. The nature of the game defeats my argument that violence in professional hockey is biological, as male testosterone coupled with a human's fight-or-flight instinct is just as relevant to these sports yet violence is not apparent. The economization and commodification of the NBA and NFL, according to Trothen, would promote violence in these sports just as it has in hockey. Yet I want to reiterate that one does not see fighting in these sports as we do in hockey. Why is this?

In Response to the Posts Against Kanye West... The Hypocritical Christian

Response Post #1: Response to the Posts Attacking Kanye West


This post is in response to all those calling out Kanye's hypocrisy. I am not sure who originally posted the topic of Kanye West's faux-Catholicism. This response will play devil's advocate (......not literally/no pun intended!) and is of course not meant as anything personal to anyone. 

"Jesus Walks" was the third single Kanye West dropped off his debut album "The College Dropout". The song was released in 2004 and since then, Kanye has embarrassed himself publicly (I don't even need to mention Taylor Swift here, do I?), posed in risqué photoshoots (Amber Rose, anyone?), written and released songs glorifying sex, alcohol, and drugs, written some more songs that defame and objectify women, and become more materialistic by the day. He tweets such eloquent remarks as "I f**k with my Timbs on" (followed by "Timbs and Jesus piece" no less) and, despite his outspoken love and affection for his mother, he continues to refer to all other women as "bitches". He is known as an egocentric who flaunts his money and designer clothing. He is known for and embraces his arrogance (another tweet to exemplify this: "Hard to be humble when you stuntin on a jumbotron"). Kanye does all of this while wearing his Jesus piece and staunchly defending his faith.

Is he a hypocrite?

Let's break down the arguments against Kanye step by step. First, people call him out for his excessive spending and materialistic ways. How can he be a good Christian, they argue, when he's spending millions on cars, clothes, alcohol, and the like? How can we call him a good Christian when it seems all he cares about - materialistically and otherwise - is himself?

According to Ivan Ruggiero, the Holy See's chief accountant, "The Vatican's real estate is worth about 700 million euro ($1.21 billion), not including its priceless art treasures." As the popular saying goes, "Sell the Vatican, feed the poor." How can we possibly sit here and call Kanye West a hypocritical, false Christian when the Vatican itself - not even including its "priceless" art treasures or its investments - is worth that kind of dough?

Further, Kanye West is an entertainer with no duty to the Catholic tradition. Our society puts celebrities on a pedestal, expecting them to be good role models. The Vatican, on the other hand, has a duty to practice what it preaches and exemplify its own teachings. Churches in general are beautifully constructed buildings with stained glass windows and well kept lots. Of course I think some of this is necessary; Churches need some money to maintain their professionalism and status in society. They need to be respectful and a service run out of a grungy run-down building would not be honoring God as it is supposed to. Do I think, however, that the Vatican's $1.2 billion is excessive? Absolutely. Do I think that the Church is hypocritical for preaching about the poor and poverty and the homeless and running soup kitchens on Sundays when the sale of even two or three "priceless" art treasures would go quite a long way for the poor?

Sell a piece of artwork and pay for the construction of a school in an underprivileged urban area. Sell another and fund scholarships for children around the world to go to university and get the education they deserve. Use that money to lay a groundwork for a better world. I don't think the Vatican should throw money at people for food and other short-term benefits. That is putting a band-aid on a much larger problem that stretches from sea to sea. The Church needs to accept the politics of modern society and use its financial wealth and sway to promote social strategy that will benefit the people in the long-term. Evidently sermons on Sundays aren't cutting it. I think Kanye West is just an example of a far deeper problem within the Church. What has the Church made headlines for in recent years? Molesting choir boys and laundering money. Hushing up scandals and lobbying against gay marriage.

I cannot sit here and judge Kanye West's faith when the Catholic tradition itself sits in a building soaked with money and jewels and priceless "treasures" of art. I cannot call out Kanye West for being a hypocrite when he has no responsibility whatsoever to believers in the Catholic faith. The Vatican, however, I can absolutely call hypocritical. Perhaps, of course, perhaps I'm uninformed. Perhaps the Church has made socio-political strides in correcting the foundations of a precariously balanced society. Perhaps the Church has been matching government dollars in federal spending on social services. Perhaps the Church has been actively using its millions of dollars for greater purposes than scepters for the Pope and maintaining historic art pieces. Perhaps I am wrong - in fact, I'd love to be wrong. Unfortunately, however, if the Church has indeed been making strides to distribute its amassed wealth to those in dire need of it - unfortunately I have yet to see or hear about it.

If the Vatican does not sell all its wealth but what it absolutely needs to function, the Catholic Church cannot expect its followers to do so either. That is why we have people like Kanye West who defend their faith while spending thousands of dollars on a Louis Vuitton satchel.  He is blamed for being a hypocritical Christian only because he is in the spotlight. I am willing to bet that anyone calling him a hypocrite is being a hypocrite themselves. Do you need a Blackberry? Did you need that Canada Goose jacket or could you have spent half as much on a winter jacket and given the other half to the homeless man you passed on your way to school? I am of course including myself in these sentiments. But if we as a generation are throwing money at expensive materialistic things we don't need - how can we possibly sit here on our Macs calling Kanye a terrible Christian?

"Jesus started the trend by telling his followers, 'If anyone wishes to be perfect, sell what you have, and give it to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven (Mark 10:21)

Bruno: Please Stop Being Melodramatic......Violence as Biological rather than Religious

Original Blog Post #1: Focused on Tracy Trothen's article on Violence in Hockey


But I don't want you to catch a grenade for me...

I’d catch a grenade for ya 

Throw my hand on a blade for ya 

I’d jump in front of a train for ya 

You know I'd do anything for ya
I would go through all this pain,
Take a bullet straight through my brain,
Yes, I would die for ya baby

Bruno Mars, sudden Top 40 sensation and teenage heartthrob, is all over the radio with his latest hit single "Grenade". The lyrics and music video depict Bruno going through various modes of pain and suffering for the woman he loves. To profess the sincerity of his love, Bruno claims that he will go through any form of death, endure any pain, any torture - blades, grenades, trains, guns - you name it -  

The question is why and how, exactly, this would prove his love. Why is death romantic? Why is a man dying for a woman the ultimate test of love? See, ladies, the thing is... Bruno won't make much of a husband if he's dead. He won't be able to provide for the children, he won't be able to take you out on Valentine's Day, and ask any single parent or widow - it's really not that much fun to lose the one you love. 

This kind of glorification of death and suffering relates to Tracy Trothen's essay on violence in professional hockey. Trothen talks about Christian atonement theories and how they've embedded normative violence in popular culture today. Trothen focused particularly on pro sport and the excessive violence, self-sacrifice, and pain accepted by the NHL and hockey as a whole, and paralleled it to Jesus' violent death on the cross for the good of humanity. Bruno Mars, likewise, in his lyrics displays self-sacrificial tendencies for the good of love - in this case, though, for a particular woman and not for all of humanity. (Apparently Bruno aims a little lower than Jesus......underachiever.)

A man willing to take a bullet for the woman he loves is not a new thing - we see it in Romeo dying for Juliet, Jack for Rose, and so on. In popular culture, a man is expected to lay his life on the line to protect the woman he loves; further, when family is involved, both parents are expected to protect their children. Look at Lily and James in Harry Potter: both of them sacrifice themselves to Voldemort to protect little Harry. (Wouldn't be much of a story if they hadn't...) Similarly, though on a larger scale, Azlan lays down his life in the Chronicles of Narnia for the safety of the children and Narnia as a whole. The act of self-sacrifice for those you love is noble, heroic, honorable, and moving. 

In sport, your team becomes your family. In sport, you depend on your teammates and they depend on you. In sport, you win as a team and you lose as a team. In sport, your team becomes both your children and your parents - it is a tight-knit relationship of blood, sweat, tears, and reciprocity. In a biological family, your ultimate goal is survival and the pursuit of happiness. Thus, the only enemy is anything that gets in the way of that happiness: on a large-scale, increasing taxes or the loss of Dad's job; on a small scale, O'Doyle bullying little Billy at recess. The government becomes the enemy and O'Doyle becomes the enemy. In a sport like hockey, there is an enemy every week; like war, anyone not with you is against you. Teams in sport are similar in a sense to the mafia, an army regiment, or a streetgang: while not a nuclear family living in suburban America, these groups all embody a type of familial mentality that is in fact often far stronger than the biological family. While Susie might run away from home to be with Bobby (he has a motorcycle and looks like James Dean.....what do you expect?), a man in the mafia would rather be shot to death by the police than rat out his associates. 

All of this underscores Trothen's points about suffering and self-sacrifice being normative in various aspects of today's society. Suffering and self-sacrifice are not found only in sport, but in many societal structures: ones accepts violence and fights for his or her country in times of war; one - particularly men - accepts violence and fights for romantic love when a spouse or partner is threatened; one accepts violence and fights off burglars, racism, bullies, and death to protect their children.

What does this mean in relation to Jesus? Does society have this self-sacrificial mentality because of Jesus' death on the cross? Have the atonement theories been so ingrained into our minds that we accept death, suffering, and violence as a condition of love? While Trothen argues yes, I argue that our attitudes toward suffering and self-sacrifice relate far more to biology and the state of nature than to religion, Christ's death on the cross, and the atonement theories. 

Humans are animals. We have the same basic needs as an animal: food, drink, sex, survival. We have the same basic instincts as an animal, particularly the "fight or flight" rationale. We have a tribal or band mentality similar to those of the great apes, horses, and wolves. That is, we came together in tribes and bands - the earliest social contract - to mutually help preserve the human species. The tribal mentality has a code embedded in it. There is a clear leader - usually male, given male's superior physical strength to females - and a pecking order. When another band enters the same territory, it is immediately considered a threat. Whether it is animals or humans - even "advanced" humans in modern society - a power struggle must be confronted for order to ensue. Only when this power struggle has affirmed one's dominance over the other - either violently or nonviolently - can the pecking order be reestablished and order and stability remain intact. 

This is a natural function of the human species. Stallions duke it out violently in a herd to determine who will lead. The loser accepts his place in the pecking order. Leadership, dominance, and winning is coveted in animals and humans alike; it is a sign of strength and respect. An NHL team is like a tribe. They confront other teams to establish a pecking order. Though they do it in a completely different way, the basics of the game are incredibly natural and animalistic. Men display physical dominance and aggressiveness to establish their leadership over the other tribes. The gain is not merely the Stanley Cup - it is what the Cup represents. 

In other aspects of pop culture, too, suffering and self-sacrifice can be traced to biological tendencies. Bruno Mars, for instance, is willing to catch a grenade for Janet Jackson because it asserts his strength and masculinity. Women, in turn, are biologically attracted to the alpha male, the most masculine of men. If Bruno were to say, "Listen, Janet, I really do love you but I simply don't think I can catch that grenade and die for you." it shows fear, timidity, and a signals to the woman that this is not a suitable mate. Women inherently realize that men are superior to them in sheer size and strength, and need those attributes in a male to ensure the protection of their young. A man who displays a lack of willingness to die for her protection is not an ideal mate. Thus she will look to Jay-Z or another man who is willing to protect her at all costs, and Bruno Mars will probably spend a fortnight eating Ben & Jerry's and crying himself to sleep. 

In regards to hockey, then, I disagree with Trothen that Christianity and Jesus' death on the cross has anything to do with the normative violence of the sport. As mentioned above, humans as a whole have a fight-or-flight instinct, and men especially have an intrinsic need to determine a pecking order through shows of physical strength and dominance (blame the testosterone). Thus in a closed arena like a hockey rink, the flight instinct is cancelled out and the players are left with one option: fight. Self-sacrifice in terms of playing through pain for the good of the team is, to me, more a show of tribalism and loyalty to the herd than a moral statement related to Jesus' death on the cross. 

I do agree with Trothen that violence is encouraged not only as an outlet of aggression but as a means of garnering profit and viewers, and to be frank I'm repulsed by that aspect of hockey. Growing up in a hockey-centered family, I have always been accustomed to the violence in a game. Like anyone else, my adrenaline began racing when the gloves came off - fights were exciting, a spectacle, entertainment. 

My brother has been playing competitive hockey since the age of five. Like many Canadian boys, he was on the ice as soon as he could walk, and it is on the same ice that he grew from a boy into a man. He was a promising and dedicated athlete who rose quickly through the ranks until he was the captain and leading scorer of a AAA team. He had OHL dreams, NHL dreams, Ovechkin dreams, Crosby dreams. He had his hockey heroes and their words of inspiration postered all over the walls of his room. He had on-ice practices several days a week and off-ice work-outs when he wasn't at the rink. His teammates and coaches were family. The actual families of the players become an extension of the team, the supporters. We cheer at their wins, groan at their penalties, cry at their losses. 


Last year my brother suffered his fourth concussion somewhere in the middle of a game. He got up off of the ice and continued to play. In fact, he continued to play - and played well - until the final buzzer of that game. He did not remember this. He did not remember coming back into the locker room. He did not remember going home. 


My brother could not graduate high school when he was supposed to. He could not read a book, even a sentence or two, without severe pain in his head. He could not listen to music, watch television, or understand basic concepts. We had to speak slowly and quietly to him and repeat instructions many times. He was confused as to when Christmas was coming, despite it being March. He could not run, play sports, go to any public location, attend his own prom, or go to university the following year. He spent most of last spring and summer in bed with the lights off, thinking about the death of his NHL dreams. 

I should really stop being such a downer - my brother has recovered quite well and, though he will never step on the ice again, he's going to university next year and has regained full cognitive function. He is completely back to his old self in all ways, a pesky little brother just like any other. This is lucky, though - it is a privilege that for those few months looked like it had a slim to none chance of occurring.  


There is definitely a reason why violence in hockey needs to be addressed. I am not naive. Like it is in life, some degree of violence is an unavoidable part of the game. Whether it derives from the natural tendencies of humans or from Christianity's atonement theories is debatable. What is not debatable is that the violence encouraged in all levels of hockey - not just professional leagues - needs to be given some serious attention and scrutiny by society. 

Andy Warhol + Jesus Christ?

What could Andy Warhol and Jesus Christ possibly have in common?

Many aspects of Christianity are deeply embedded in today's popular culture - this blog, created for SMC305 at the University of Toronto, will show you over the course of the semester a few examples of how exactly Jesus Christ is still the man around town. Albeit in an entirely different way, but his presence is undoubtedly still lingering around in every medium of popular culture - film, music, art, television, and literature.

PS. I signed up late for this class so forgive me for being a bit behind! I'll catch up soon :)

- genevieve