I’ve come to the conclusion that religious faith is a kind of mental illness that was made socially acceptable to keep primitive people from constantly killing each other, sticking instead to only occasionally killing each other within a vague set of guidelines.
Those of us free of it don’t need an insane corkscrew of Escheresque logic and imaginary higher authorities using threats commanding us to not be monsters.
People in the past weren’t us in different clothes and religion was basically fulfilling political and cultural functions as well. Like today was have mass media and entertainment, at one point religion was basically entertainment as well. People loved having some preacher come to town and do his show, it was what people talked about. Now we have TV shows and movies etc, and a lot of our media has shocking moral implications just as we’d judge religion in the past for. Not all that different. That leads in to civil/civic religion which is practiced by many today and provides a framework for things like a national identity. When you stand for an anthem you’re performing a civil religious ritual, visiting historical/cultural sites is a sort of pilgrimage.
The form that religion evolved through in history was also defined by the conditions of the society and a lot of times compromises with neighboring powers. Viewing religion as a dumb thing for stupid people is intuitively tempting, but it’s ahistorical in that it says more about our views today (including religous/civil religious views) than it does about what people were like in the past.
I mean you might be kinda right?
So there are people who think with or without internal monologue, common knowledge
Some people think that the internal monologue may have first developed as an internal dialogue, between the actor, the person and their body, and the “speaker” who they would have not been able to recognize as their own voice, and instead interpreted as a separate being relaying them direction, commands, and interpretation.
The dissociation between the individual and their internal monologue, and the resulting association of that monologue with a directing and counseling presence, could have been taken as the voice of a higher power guiding them, and by extension, others they got to follow them as the “speaker” of this divinity in their head.
If this sounds a bit crazy to you consider how many evangelicals rant and rave about their personal speaking term relationship with God.
So basically, deific religion might derive from people who have an internal monologue but who don’t identify with the speaker of that internal monologue.
Not really a mental disorder so much as a mode of thought that is prone to lead people into believing firmly that they are personally in contact with a separate being who personally directs their behavior and actions and values.
I recently came to a different conclusion. It’s not religious faith. It’s just faith. And it’s not a mental illness. It’s human nature - for a significant segment of the human population.
Those people who are religious fanatics, political fanatics (e.g. Trumpists, Chavez sympathizers), pseudoscience fanatics (e.g. flat earthers, anti-vaxx, homeopathy), celebrity fanatics (Andrew Tate followers), etc, they have to share the same common traits. They’re impressionable people, they need to be patt of a group, and they can’t fathom the idea of switching groups.
It’s just that religion-based control came first.
Or maybe those who were very religious in the past got to survive and thus the genetic traits responsible for fanaticism spread like fire?
Regardless, it’s appalling.
Hugo Chavez followers. They’re as bad if not worse than Trump or Putin followers.
Like Hugo Chavez? Are there any people who care enough about him who arent Venezuelan?
Like Tito, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Trotsky, Che Guevara are all infinitely more valid than fucking Chavez.
I was homeschooled and it was fine, I did great on standardized tests, had friends, am not a fundamentalist nutjob, etc… I’d like to say to these people please stay, I know it’s hard for them but what they’re doing is desperately needed. Lots of those people are decent people who live in an echo chamber of conservative insanity, they need patient loving people like you to show up and let them see there’s more to life than their bubble.
Or we could just outlaw homeschooling and take away parental rights for anyone who tries to do it anyways.
Child abuse, child marriages, child SA, and parentification numbers would plummet over night once these fundy bastards lost their ability to breed new cultists like rabbits.
Yeah let’s ruin a thing that works for a lot of people just because some people do it badly. great take.
“Works” for a lot of people while robbing money from the public education system they’re taking vouchers to not pay for.
I suppose the question would be if it works for some people, and even then, would institutional learning really not work for the same people?
To the extent potentially functional folks can’t deal with educational institutions, it’s likely that the “real world” will inflict similar challenges. Usually best to acclimate to those situations rather than trying to avoid the unavoidable.
I think you’re vastly overestimating how often those things happen in homeschool. Most of them are awesome people that just happen to be stuck in a terrible media bubble.
And if there were no homeschool the crazy fundie portion of homeschoolers would just send their kids to a crazy fundie private school or move to a small town where everyone in the public school were all crazy fundies also.
Similar situation here. I was raised home schooled for all of my education. Got a GED, good score on the ACT, got a 4.0 in the community college where I got an associates degree. The problem is parents who homeschool because they don’t want their kids to turn “woke” or be “converted” by exposure to the fact that non-straight, non-cis people exist. A lot of the time, the emphasis is only on indoctrination, and there is little or no actual education involved.
I have been to homeschool conferences - there are some good resources there, and a LOT of really pretty awful stuff like this article mentioned. People like the author are so incredibly impactful, even if they don’t realize it. They may never see results but those seeds matter. Even if the parents don’t get it, the kids will.
At a conference last year, there was a speaker talking about parenting difficult children (Kirk Martin with Celebrate Calm). He was presenting very much a solid gentle parenting approach (though he didn’t call it that) that is very contrary to the culture of a lot of homeschool groups. He spent a lot of time unpacking his experiences as someone who grew up with really strict physical discipline, the impact it had on him, his experience being a parent - kind of leading people on a journey from where they might be to where they should be as parents.
He also spent a bit of his talk on how the Bible doesn’t teach us to raise our kids to fight in a culture war and just really pretty clearly calling out a lot of the toxic far right christian-nationalist talking points. Sure he made a lot of people uncomfortable, but those thoughts will stick with them.
After his talk he was spent over an hour talking with people outside of the conference room answering questions. His next talk was packed as well.
Anyway, all that to say - I know it can take a lot out of someone to deal with people in those environments, but it is absolutely impactful and so desperately needed.
When I hear a woman say “I’m not a feminist” my first thought is “WHY THE HELL NOT??”
Perhaps their understanding of feminism has come from the violently extreme “kill all men” types of feminists or the opposing “get back in the kitchen” type of conservative shitbags making up all sorts of scary and mean things about them.
They absolutely do. They are by no means the majority, but extremes exist in any movement. There are “feminists” who think it’s all about sticking it to the man (literally) or proving feminine superiority. It’s like Christians who don’t read the Bible and think it’s all about damning the gross icky people to hell. That doesn’t mean they’re common (they aren’t), but I’ve seen a few crazies on Tumblr and Twitter.
Edit: J.K.Rowling is one of them (kinda).
because the word feminism has different meanings for different people. for some it means equality and a way to get there. for others it means men are bad and women should get priority treatment. communication is hard when there is no objective meaning for any of the words we are using.
But that second meaning is a bogeyman. No one says “I am a feminist” and means that.
No one? There are 8 billion people screaming out whatever random ideas occurs to them for hours a day across the planet. You can’t make that statement about anything anymore.
Also there is also just plain misinformation campaigns. People creating strawman arguments pretending to be on the other side.
Because a lot of modern (so-called 3rd wave) “feminists” are just greedy people demanding things that will advantage them but doing so behind the cover of the group so that it doesn’t look like all the other greedy bastards - it’s rightwing thinking disguised as “for the group”, which is why they worry way more about “the glass ceiling” (which disadvantages high middle class people who aren’t in an “old boys network”, which includes almost all women from thst social strata) rathar than, say, the very low salaries for women who are blue collar workers.
The previous waves of Feminism were of the “we want to be treated like everybody else” (or as I like to think of it: “get out of my way and let me be all that I can be”).
People react very differently to the “gimme shit” crowd than they do the “stop hindering me” one, and sadly the former are a lot louder (as usual for people driven by greed) and have come to dominate the image of Feminism in Anglo-Saxon countries.
With “a lot” you mean the handful of loud obnoxious people who only do that to get attention?
Because that isn’t even close to the majority.
There still are differences in treatment between the sexes, even if you yourself don’t notice them.
For example, just look up what the Bechdel test is and the difference between the reverse Bechdel test. There is still a huge difference how women get treated compared to men in media.
But the other way around also happens. Mothers still get more custody over kids than the Father. Which is ALSO something Feminists fight to fix.
For the same reason they oppose public health, public school, trans rights, diversity, equity, and inclusion. They literally don’t know what they are.
I know at least 2 Republicans that when you actually talk about individual policy preferences it comes across as moderate democrat. One of them was a virulent PRO masker because of their job.
I think people just don’t pay attention to actual policies, it’s all just the soundbites and controversy.
Homeschooled kids are either geniuses or ignoramuses. There is no in-between.
I have often read sovereign citizen groups on Facebook, and they all “homeschool”, which means the big kids babysit the little ones all day long, and sometimes CPS gets involved and removes the kids and terminates their parental rights because they realize the kids aren’t getting educated and are having the shit best out of them routinely. I think homeschooling can be very dangerous for a child.
I’m not very for homeschooling and it has its place, the problem is that it lacks regulation.
There should be an official education program and tests to make sure kids are learning essential things instead of just babysitting siblings or exclusively learning religious or survivalist stuff.
