On strapping

Paul Krugman rattles off a long series of "innocent mistakes" that President Ronald Reagan made that may have led some people to conclude that he had a pattern of pandering to white racists.

Like, say, kicking off his campaign for president at the notorious site of the murder of three civil rights workers and proclaiming there, "I believe in states rights."

Or his urban myths about "welfare queens." Or his siding with Bob Jones University in support of its ban against interracial dating. Or his opposition to Martin Luther King Day. That sort of thing.

I think I've discovered the religious root of at least one of Reagan's innocent mistakes. Here's how Krugman summarizes it:

In 1976, he talked about working people angry about the “strapping young buck” using food stamps to buy T-bone steaks at the grocery store.

Granted, that sounds bad. "Strapping young buck" is, after all, language taken directly from the auction block. By using such language, Reagan doesn't just seem to have been merely signaling his sympathy for segregationists -- he seems to have been signaling his sympathy for slavery.

But I think I can explain how Reagan and others like him were just making an "innocent mistake" based on their reading of the Bible.

Specifically, Acts 8:26-39. This is the story of the apostle Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch.

Now to a liberal backslider such as myself, this passage is another example of the anvilicious motif of inclusion that dominates the first half of Luke's account. Luke is taking great pains in these pages to show that the gospel is meant for everyone, and thus selects an unsubtle series of representative encounters: the European gentile businesswoman; the African official; the Roman centurion. It's like the politically correct ensemble of an after-school special. The previous two chapters told the story of Stephen -- an official in the church's affirmative action program for the Greek widows. And this chapter begins with the apostle Philip preaching among the Samaritans -- the ultimate despised pariah group for the young church. (I picture Theophilus rolling his eyes by this point, "Yes, yes, Luke, I get it. Every tribe and every nation as equals in a single community. Point made already.")

In the latter half of Acts 8, Philip is suddenly whisked off to Africa, where he meets "an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians." Philip tells him "the good news about Jesus," baptizes this new member of the multiethnic, transnational community of believers, and the man goes on his way rejoicing.

So to a reprobate liberal reader such as myself, it would seem that a passage like the eighth chapter of Acts would be strong evidence that Reagan's attitude ought to be anathema for Christians. How then do we account for "Christians" like those from Bob Jones University, or the many more "good, Christian people" to whom Reagan was appealing with his loaded language and his racist description of this "strapping young buck"?

The explanation, I think, lies in Dr. Tim LaHaye's reminder that:

"Unless you take [the Bible] literally, you will never understand it. The key to receiving blessing from this very exciting book is to take it literally, just as the Lord intended."

A literal interpretation of Acts 8 doesn't get bogged down in consideration of the motifs and the themes of Luke's account. It doesn't worry itself with distracting questions like, "What is the context?" or "What does this story mean?" It simply focuses on the words themselves.

Read literally, Acts 8 does not teach that all people everywhere are welcome into the community of believers. It teaches, rather, that African men are welcome only if they are eunuchs.

I'm being facetious, of course. I don't know of anyone who explicitly advocates this particular literal reading of this particular text. And yet, somehow, America is rife with nominally "Christian" people who act and live and behave (and, yes, vote) as though this were precisely what they believed.

Odd, that.

(For further reading: The Southern Strategy Revisited, by Joseph A. Aistrup; Soul on Ice, by Eldridge Cleaver; The Gospel in Black & White, by Dennis L. Okholm, ed.)

Comments

[cjmr's husband]

application of a rubber band

..... and now we're back to the topic On Strapping.

[Rosina]

cjmr: Didn't a freak storm destroy the set of Life of Brian?

You may be thinking of Terry Gilliam's version of Don Quixote where among all the other problems a flash flood turned a road full of vehicles, camera gear and props into a river.

Unlikely to be down to God, unless He's a Spaniard.

[Ember Keelty]

Unlikely to be down to God, unless He's a Spaniard.

If that were the case, don't you think he'd have had to do something about that one MPFC sketch?

[Jesurgislac]

He probably wasn't expecting it.

[cjmr's husband]

Jes wins.

[Tonio]

That is, before I read far too much slash fanfic.

I first heard of that genre in David Gerrold's book "The World of Star Trek," although I didn't know the genre had a name. Gerrold said the authors of the Kirk/Spock slash stories were almost all women. Can anyone explain why? I would have assumed that the authors would be gay men hoping to encourage diversity in fan fiction.

[LMM]

Gerrold said the authors of the Kirk/Spock slash stories were almost all women. Can anyone explain why? I would have assumed that the authors would be gay men hoping to encourage diversity in fan fiction.

For the exact same reason why most of the people who rent lesbian porn are actually straight males.

I suspect there's also some element of sexual repression involved. It's easier to justify porn if it's (1) literary and (2) happens to involve actual characters.

[Nate]

For largely the same reasons men write or read or look at lesbian porn. Twice what they want to look at, no uncomfortable moments of looking at their own gender.

Also, because slashfic often tends to involve characters acting out of character in ways that titillate the audience and let them project their own desires on to the characters. So there's genres just about nookie, and then there's genres where the characters are all OMG FEELINGS!

That's my theory anyway.

[Tonio]

LMM, I wasn't aware that many straight women found male homosexuality to be arousing. It makes sense the other way because our culture inculcates a certain level of homosexual panic in men - with lesbian porn, straight men don't have to worry about male nudity while they're turned on. But there doesn't seem to be a similar phenomenon with women. One doesn't hear little girls tell their peers, "What, you don't like dresses and dolls? What are you, a lesbian?"

It's worth mentioning the common portrayal in the media of women appreciating gay men as friends and confidantes, not as unattainable lust objects. Maybe that's because writers and directors harbor the homophobic notion that gay men are not just effeminate but feminine.

[jamoche]

Oh, you're opening up a huge barrel of worms with "why women like slash" :)

Most slash does *not* have the men acting effeminate or talking about feelings (yaoi is a whole different matter). Doing so would be considered "out of character" (ranking up there with Mary Sue-ism in the list of fanfic hates) given who the characters usually are - pick any random buddy-cop or scifi show with good looking guys, there's going to be a slash following (due South, Star Trek, both Stargates...)

What I see most frequently (perhaps because this is why I like it, and so I seek out like-minded individuals) is women who like it for the sense of equality. Neither partner has to be "the girl" - the subordinate, submissive, always-needing-rescue, you name it, part of the equation. I actually have no objection to het fic that does that, but unless the female partner is, say, Samantha Carter of SG-1, it's pretty damn rare (and even so they still sometimes make her "the girl" - but that's just as OOC for Sam!) I don't find looking at my own gender uncomfortable, just boring.

[bulbul]

Hark, ye Slacktivites! The Legendary Write-Off of 2007 has begun! Go to Right Behind and let your voice be heard!

[Dahne]

@LMM: I suspect there's also some element of sexual repression involved. It's easier to justify porn if it's (1) literary and (2) happens to involve actual characters.

Well, that's pretty close, as long as you replace "justifiable" with "interesting."

If sex is poorly written and involves characters I don't know or care about, why should I have any interest in it?

But then, I'm the kind of person who sometimes skips description in sex scenes to get to the dialogue.

As for why het bores me, it has nothing to do with disliking my own gender, but a lot to so with despising how my own gender is portrayed. I've gotten so tired of the constant onslaught of perfunctory het romance in everything that, for a very long time, I thought I hated romance altogether. Main Male Character MUST end up with Main Female Character, regardless of how little actually interesting they bring out in each other. Yawn. No thanks.

(In fact, I harbor a suspicion that that very law is part of what began the whole contingent of people who believe with passionate fervor that Harry Potter and Hermione belonged together. Then it went batshit insane.)

It may just be because one of my deepest, most fundamental traits is sheer contrariness.

Nothing grates me like seeing anyone in a relationship sacrifice their individuality and character to become The Girl. The patterns and stereotypes of het romance are so encoded and battered into people that it's almost impossible to avoid, and a startling amount of people never even try.

Also, I have a terrible weakness for Bad Guy and Good Guy getting to know one another and slowly developing understanding and affection and love toward one another and all that horrible fluffy drek. (A genre to which I have personally contributed...*cough*) It's not nearly as interesting if one of them skips all the development by the magic power of Being A Hot Girl. (Though, come to think of it, I would be intersted in seeing something like that that involved Evil Girl/Good Guy. Or Evil Girl/Good Girl.)

I love seeing completely disparate people together (but working it out, and not one of those horrible "oooh I hate you so much let's fuck" things). I hate seeing the safest possible combination, the pairings that go cheerfully along with every rule - boy taller than girl, same basic background, same age or guy older than girl, same basic background, etc etc etc.

The exception that proves is the rule is that there are canon het romances that I don't find horrifically dull: maybe two or three of them. In a world packed full of them. For example, Wash and Zoe in Firefly, or Liz and Abe in that Hellboy: Sword of Storms thing. And Solidus and Mei Ling in that wonderfully insane and not at all to be taken seriously extra thing in MGS2.

And there, ladies and gentle, are my Thoughts on Yaoi. Which is only appropriate, considering I've read enough of it that the title of this post took my mind directly to a giggly place.

Anyway, I like yuri too.

[Geds]

Which is only appropriate, considering I've read enough of it that the title of this post took my mind directly to a giggly place.

To be fair, Dahne, I've read absolutely zero yaoi/slash and I don't watch porn, yet the title's post took me to exactly the same place..

[Ember Keelty]

One doesn't hear little girls tell their peers, "What, you don't like dresses and dolls? What are you, a lesbian?"

I expect "one" doesn't spend much time around little girls. ;)

Or Evil Girl/Good Girl.

Yes PLEASE. *drool*

And because this is Slacktivist, I'm now imagining Hattie the Whore of Babylon with Chloe. And it is hot.

[Dahne]

@Ember Keelty: Wow. Now THAT I would like to see.

[cjmr]

None of the contestants put any cheese in their sandwiches. What's up with that?

[jackd]

Having just read a passage about the Inquisition in Neal Stephenson's The Confusion, my first thought was that "On strapping" was going to be another post on torture. (see Strappado)

On the actual topic, as Josh pointed out, "strapping" is not the racist part of the term. Referring to a WASP as "a fine strapping young man" is not unheard-of.

[Ecks]

Hm, good discussion of the Pterry thing, thanks.

I'm not at all upset that the Hermione/Harry thing didn't happen, I'm more upset that the Ron/Hermione thing did. It just seems unbalanced. She's smart AND hot, he's not so smart and... well, slightly bumbling, with mood regulation issues to boot. I mean, his heart is in the right place and he generally comes through in the end, but... that seems to be setting the bar pretty low. I wonder, is she being punished for being a smart woman that she has to end up with the slightly doofy guy?

[hapax]

I personally was so teary-eyed grateful that the smart girl was NOT the one wearing glasses that it practically overshadowed everything else.

But I never saw Hermione and Ron as a couple, either. And Ginny was so patently created as "Harry's romantic interest" that I couldn't believe in her either. Honestly, I sometimes think the most convincing relationships in HP-land are in the slashfic.

[Ecks]

I've put a voting widget on the Right Behind site (thanks for the step by step on that Bulbul). You may commence voting on the main and bonus questions at your leisure.

When should the poll be set to expire? I gave it 4 days.

BTW, voting rules:

1) One vote each
2) No peaking first
3) Enforced by the honor system (please break one of your own appendages for each violation of these rules, thank you kindly).

Sub note: As you can see, rule #3 here, as per the Slacktivist Comment Section's reigning matriarchal norms, is biased in favour of women; in the event of extreme repeat offending they run out of appendages first, and thus can sooner start cheating without consequence.

[bulbul]

Nicely done, Ecks and thanks for the account.
I believe we have agreed on a Thursday deadline, so that we can anounce the winner just before LB Friday. Friday morning (EST) deadline is OK, too.

[cjmr]

"Peaking"?

[bulbul]

hapax, Ecks,

you, my friends, are sooo lucky I finished HP6 and HP7 over the weekend.

he's not so smart and... well, slightly bumbling, with mood regulation issues to boot
Are we talking movies Ron or books Ron here?

[bulbul]

cjmr,

don't check the results before voting.

[cjmr]

yeah. That's peeking

[bulbul]

Oh. Right. Sorry :)

[Ecks]

you, my friends, are sooo lucky I finished HP6 and HP7 over the weekend.

Except she's basically been setting this right up in the open since, what, HP3 or 4?

Anyways, as a famous antichrist once said, "spelling is bnuk".

[Ecks]

I set the polls to expire at 12:00 pm on 11/15/07... which should be midday Thursday, right? But the page displays this as "2 days left to vote." WTF?

[inge]

Tonio: Gerrold said the authors of the Kirk/Spock slash stories were almost all women. Can anyone explain why?

Some theories -- I can dig up more:

First, men in slash fic are not exactly like men, be they gay or straight, in real life. They are often far more like women would like men to be in real life. The writers take what they see of the characters and idealize them -- make them more open, more romantic, more in touch with their feelings, more willing to talk, until at some point the reality check bounces, disbelief comes crashing down and the readers (also female) complain about uke-fication of the characters.

Second, slash dodges the gendered power issues that plague every het romance, and at the same time opens a neat can of worms on other issues.

Third, slash is transgressive -- you can really shake up the characters who would usually bed everything "under fifty, warm and willing" [and, never said but always meant, female]. You can also parody some of the characters' over-masculinity and/or misogyny by making them tortured closet-cases or flaming queens. It can also be instant plot of the "forbidden love" type, which is hard to do in many settings. (And the other common "forbidden love" trope, interracial, has enough flame war potential to solve half the world's energy problems. Few fan authors are willing risk that.)

Fourth, slash also dodges identification issues. Writing het smut, a straight women is "outside" -- she does not readily identify with the male, because she has no interest in the girl, but she doesn't easily identify with the female either, because a) she's not her, and b) the girl is usually the Love Interest of the Week and really boring. With two guys, the reader, who already identifies with the guys on the show can identify with any, or both.

And finally, for many het or bi women, two guys = teh hawt.

[Jenny Islander]

Movie!Ron is significantly stupider than Book!Ron--kind of like Movie!Watson vs. Book!Watson. Remember, Ron was able to play a winning chess match against (presumably) Professor McGonagall's personal intelligent chess set under hideous pressure when he was eleven or twelve.

[bulbul]

Except she's basically been setting this right up in the open since, what, HP3 or 4?
Suspecting and knowing are two different things. Doubly so in case of Harry and Ginny.

[inge]

Tonio: One doesn't hear little girls tell their peers, "What, you don't like dresses and dolls? What are you, a lesbian?"

Not little girls, but wait until they are teenagers... many of the girls in my school who were neither feminine nor nerds (nerd-dom excused one from sex) were rumoured to be a lesbian.

Or has this got better since I was in school? (It wasn't that bad, though, nothing worse than rumours.)

[inge]

Ember Keelty: [Evil Girl/Good Girl.] Yes PLEASE. *drool*

Faith/Buffy. Maybe Talia/Ivanova. And there are possibilities in "Stardust"...

[Dahne]

It always surprises me how outright insulting a lot of theories about why women like slash are. It's almost as bad as what I've heard from at least one source speculating on why people find glee in finding instances of HoYay - that "women can't imagine that any close relationship between men could not be sexual." Yeesh.

[inge]

cjmr: Cheese is evil.

[inge]

Dahne, quoting: "women can't imagine that any close relationship between men could not be sexual."

I had heard something similar from an old slasher, though put a little differently: The relationships between the "buddy" characters in buddy movies are written in a way that goes far beyond what anyone expects, much less has experienced, from friendship. The characters' devotion to each other fits "love" far better than "friendship" -- and where love is, lust isn't far...

Where the markings on the scale are is very much a matter of zeitgeist, though. Some expressions which can quite believably mark "friendship" in a fandom several decades old, these days have a bunch of dancing pixies yelling "subtext!".

I think I'll have to dig out that ancient slash writer survey. Must be somewhere on my hard drive...

[cjmr]

It isn't a sandwich unless it has cheese. The only exception being peanut butter sandwiches, and even they are better with a little cream cheese in. On the jelly side. Not that I can eat peanut butter sandwiches any more, as I'm allergic to peanuts now.

[Dahne]

inge: That's a much better way of putting it, I think.

The change over time and place is definitely true. Dostoyevsky is much more entertaining if you disregard the 19th century Russian practice of kissing as expressing filial affection and imagine that everybody is just making out all the time.

[Ecks]

Doubly so in case of Harry and Ginny.

True. Though that one is basically of no consequence, and no dramatic tension whatsoever. There's more tension over who wins most of the Quidich games, and those have no plot ramifications whatsoever either. It's almost shocking that for such a brilliant story teller she devotes a bunch of space to plot-by-the-numbers.

[Ecks]

Inge: Cheese is evil.

Heretic! Persecute! Kill!!

How strange that I've been posting to this blog that is ostensibly about religion for [I-don't-know-but-a-long-time] now, and despite zero prior mentions, we cover within 1 week the two topics on which I have near evangelical zeal. Tea and cheese are pretty close to the meaning of life. I *believe* in them. Especially blue cheese, and good black tea with a solid splash of milk, a drizzle of honey, and/or a few spoonfulls of sugar. Mmmmmm.

<Ecks comes back from a happy place>
Man, if it was a choice between keeping those 2 or sex, that'd be a real squeaker...

[bulbul]

It isn't a sandwich unless it has cheese.
This statement on its own could start a religion.

[Ember Keelty]

Dostoyevsky is much more entertaining if you disregard the 19th century Russian practice of kissing as expressing filial affection and imagine that everybody is just making out all the time.

Grushenka x Katya = OTP?

[Ecks]

OTP = Over The Phone? One True Pairing? On the Piss? Orbital Time Processor? Other Trustworthy Person?

It isn't a sandwich unless it has cheese.
This statement on its own could start a religion.

And I volunteer for high priest duty. I demand a fancy hat.

[Dahne]

Grushenka x Katya = OTP?

Hell yes!

[hapax]

Ecks: I demand a fancy hat.

Ask, and ye shall receive.

[Ecks]

Grushenka & Katya show up as characters in a Dostoevsky book, and also in the movie The White Countess... where both were played by actors with the same first name (Madeleine). All I can add is: 'Lawkes, was that ever a lousy film'.

[Ecks]

Awesome, a Wisconsin Llama.

Cartoons always seem to feature Swiss, which is a highly overrated cheese.

When I die and go to heaven, the great mouse in the sky will show me around, saying things like

"and this is the Camembert room, and this, over here is the Gloucester room, and thiiis door opens up on the great Roquefort plains. Turn left past that tree there, and there's a little row boat tied up next to lake poutine. Oh, if you get thirsty at any point there are emergency tea pots under the chairs, and tea bags will drop from the bulkhead above you..."

[Duane]

Cheese makes my butt hurt.

[Pope Easier Rhino I]

As obviously the only person here who is trashy enough to admit it, I must dutifully protest on behalf of my white-trash brethren that it isn't a sandwich if it doesn't have mayo. Cheese, while terrific, is a secondary concern.

Of course, I can't eat mayo. And I believe in the supremacy of the burrito in any case. So maybe I should leave the prosyletization to someone else. Burritos are good with cheese though.

[Ecks]

Yes Duane, but we were already aware of your unholy arse :)