Troubled Waters

Threads of Connection

It is interesting how threads are woven through a set of seemingly unconnected events, with our perception of things becoming the glue between them. I confess I am given to a kind of apophenia, forever spotting strange connections, though that word does not quite capture what I mean.

Here, I was drawn to a headline about cannibalism: a daughter had ingested flakes of her mother's ashes. Why she would announce or publish that information escapes me, at least until we put names to the dramatis personae. The daughter was Rachael Stirling, and the mother the late Dame Diana Rigg. [The Guardian: ‘I didn’t expect to be portrayed as a cannibal’]

Perhaps eating a parent's ashes is a way of reconnecting with them in death; but how an urn became a spice shaker is never going to find a convincing explanation beyond the bizarre. I will resist the temptation to ask whether it was a ready peppercorn grinder, though the thought is beneath me and I confess I had it anyway. Each to their own, I suppose.

Remembering Diana Rigg

I should say actresses, or actors now, since the gender classification for that profession seems to have been lost to modern parlance.

We know Diana Rigg, of course, from "The Avengers", where she played an emancipated female spy and partner to John Steed, portrayed by Patrick Macnee. In the first series she was paid £150 a week, and it was for the second series that she held out for the increase, demanding £450. [Meaww: Diana Rigg was a 'lone voice in the wilderness' when she demanded equal pay back in the '60s as Emma Peel]

What strikes me as equally interesting is that the money was there to pay her properly all along; she had discovered she was being paid less than the cameraman. Yet until she made the case for why she was worth that much more, no one thought to pay her adequately. [BBC: Dame Diana Rigg: How the actress battled TV's gender pay gap]

A Sunday with Columbo

My Sundays revolve around a standing date with "Columbo", the detective series endlessly on replay for as long as I can remember. I could watch the episodes over and over without ever feeling exhausted by knowing the plot, or by trying to fill in the gaps from memory.

Now, guess who is the guest actor in the episode playing from 9:00 pm this Sunday night? Patrick Macnee, cast as Captain Gibbon of a luxury cruise ship. The episode is "Troubled Waters", in which Hayden Danziger, played by Robert Vaughn, murders his mistress aboard the ship.

His wife, Sylvia Danziger, played by Jane Greer, is the older and wealthier partner in the marriage, and she holds a quiet, dominant sway over her husband. She shares a wonderfully sharp exchange with Lieutenant Columbo, played by Peter Falk, in which she lets slip just how firmly she keeps the reins, hinting that Hayden would come to rue the day were she ever to catch him straying.

Troubling Convention

It occurs to me that each of these women is quietly, or not so quietly, troubling the waters of convention: one defending her mourning, one her wage, one her marriage.

An AI-generated infographic on the blog content. (Click to enlarge.)

It is remarkable how things link up in almost incomprehensible ways: amidst the troubled waters of people revealing what is best kept to themselves, of people claiming what is rightfully theirs by standing up to a system set against them, and an episode on a cruise liner where the murderer believed himself far too clever to be caught.

A Gemini Notebook AI Podcast on this blog

Losing my religion in this reformation split

A Rift Turns into a Schism

On Thursday, the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (GAFCON) announced a plan to reform the Anglican Communion into the Global Anglican Communion. This development appeared to be intensified by the nomination of a woman for the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury. [GAFCON: Communique: The Future Has Arrived]

However, GAFCON's rejection of the Instruments of Communion; namely the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), and the Primates Meeting, has led to a schism. Some deny that this split aims to reconstitute the Global Anglican Communion as a majority representation of about 75% of its previous reach. It is a major development when what is left in the Anglican Communion is a rump of the original whole.

The core issues that have brought matters to a head revolve mainly around sexuality, as some GAFCON provinces ordain women into the diaconate, priesthood, and bishopric. Yet, we must be careful not to assume that only ‘conservatives’ or those ‘stuck in patriarchy’ are concerned or impacted by the appointment of a female Archbishop of Canterbury.

Refocusing on the Word

As an Anglican communicant, I am encouraged by the warmth and humanity of the congregations I attend in Manchester and Cape Town. There are wider community issues that many grapple with; conservatives, progressives, and all believers alike earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints. [Bible Gateway: Jude 3 (KJV)]

The focus must remain on the resurrected Christ, the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and adherence to the inerrant Word of God. My beliefs are shaped by a Pentecostal inclination; I am equally comfortable anywhere God is glorified and the Word is preached with purpose, according to the level of revelation given to the preacher. My spirit and understanding allow me to agree, disagree, or seek further study after hearing.

While I am saddened by developments within the Anglican Communion, no one should be surprised that a new reformation is underway, as the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA) and GAFCON affirm only one foundation of communion, namely, the Holy Bible, “translated, read, preached, taught and obeyed in its plain and canonical sense, respectful of the church’s historic and consensual reading.”

Breaking religion, affirming faith

In response, the letter from The Rt Reverend and Rt Honourable Dame Sarah Mullally DBE, the Archbishop of Canterbury designate, appears to be written from a position of weakness; the people she hopes to engage with are unlikely to attend the Anglican Consultative Council in Belfast next year. [Anglican Ink: Letter from Bishop Sarah Mullally on LLF, GAFCON and abuse]

This news coincides with King Charles III, the head of the Anglican Church, meeting with Pope Leo, marking the first occasion in about 500 years that a British monarch has prayed with the Pope. [BBC News: King to be first British monarch to pray with Pope in at least 500 years]

How this affects the King’s role in the Anglican Communion or the new Global Anglican Communion remains uncertain. Many moving parts are at play as we all try to understand the issues involved, some of which I have not directly addressed here. I find myself asking whether I am losing my religion, or if my religion is losing me?

My faith looks up to Thee, Thou Lamb of Calvary. [Hymnal.net: My faith looks up to Thee]

Blog - England: We have a new Archbishop of Canterbury, she's a woman

GSFA Statement on the Appointment of the Rt Revd Dame Sarah Mullally, Bishop of London, as the Archbishop of Canterbury

GAFCON: Communique: Canterbury Appointment Abandons Anglicans

England: We have a new Archbishop of Canterbury, she's a woman

The lots of conversion

When Archbishop Justin Welby, the 105th Archbishop of Canterbury resigned his archbishopric with an announcement late last year, I confided in my best friend about how I might not be ready for a female to succeed him, but I had a premonition that the direction of travel was towards something unprecedented.

The selection, election, and appointment of the Archbishop of Canterbury as the spiritual head of the Anglican Communion closely resembles the story in Acts of the Apostles, where the disciples cast lots for Apostle Matthias, about whom we hear little after that event. In contrast, Saul of Tarsus’s conversion on the road to Damascus, from Pharisee to Apostle Paul, who authored about half of the New Testament, is a remarkable transformation.

The politics of enthronement

This nomination is both an administrative process conducted by the Crown Nominations Commission and a political one, where the Prime Minister, who could easily be non-Christian, presents the nominated candidate to the monarch, the titular head of the Church of England, for approval.

The enthronement of the Archbishop of Canterbury follows a legal Confirmation of Election, after which the individual legally becomes the Archbishop, followed by the Installation service at Canterbury Cathedral, signalling the start of their tenure.

Yesterday, the Bishop of London, The Right Reverend and Right Honourable Dame Sarah Mullally DBE, was appointed as the archbishop designate, to be installed as the 106th Archbishop of Canterbury in March 2026.

A precedent in perspective

It was not until 1994 that women were ordained to the priesthood within the Church of England; this progressive move had already begun in some other Anglican provinces globally.

The first female bishops in the Church of England were elected in 2014, and by early 2026, we will have the first female Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England and Metropolitan. [Wikipedia: List of female Anglican bishops]

I do not consider myself particularly conservative within the Anglican Communion. I am encouraged by the progress in ordaining women, improvements in safeguarding, and the church’s embrace of a broader understanding of spirituality across different sexual orientations, including even blessing same-sex relationships where churches are receptive.

Faith, however, is a journey with no final destination; only a continuous pursuit to understand more of God’s love and mercy, and how His Spirit leads and inspires the church to become more Christ-like.

The frayed bonds of unity

From a human perspective, I am uncertain whether, amidst ongoing disagreements about women’s ordination, even within my own diocese portends toward uniting the Anglican Communion.

Typically, two sets of ordinations occur: one for those who accept women bishops, and then a visiting bishop, representing those who do not, comes to ordain those of that persuasion. The debate over same-sex relationships keeps the church divided doctrinally and morally, yet this exists in a fragile détente.

Personally, I remain unsure whether the church has gained enough stature to fully weather these changes. It’s only been eleven years since the first female bishop was appointed. But this makes one reflect on the well-known African proverb: “If you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together.”

The journey of persuasion

The church has come quite far, whether it is now the time to go fast, leaves me in a quandary of my Anglican faith, something that might have to grow on me, because the hierarchy in this selection seems way ahead of my current conviction.

While I have fleeting thoughts about exploring Catholicism, I have yet to find a way or a path to reach the gates of the Vatican and kiss the fisherman’s ring of the Bishop of Rome.

Nevertheless, there is work to be done; much like with other Church of England initiatives, to pause on some of these advances and draw into full fellowship those left unpersuaded of these fast forms of modernisation and progressiveness that we might all travel far together for the amazing aims of the gospel.

Ultimately, we pray that the ministry of the new Archbishop of Canterbury be blessed with purpose, insight, and unity within the church. An essential truth about our humanity is that we all struggle and seek to be persuaded beyond our narrow perspectives.

The sketch from Yes, Prime Minister, offers an intriguing perspective on the Church of England.

Choosing a New Bishop | Yes, Prime Minister | BBC Comedy Greats [YouTube]

References

Wikipedia: Archbishop of Canterbury

Wikipedia: Ordination of women in the Anglican Communion

The Church of England: Appointing a new Archbishop of Canterbury

The Church of England: Members of the Canterbury Crown Nominations Commission

Africa and the mind-set of non-issues

Not waiting in vain any longer

I was not particularly ululating over Barack Obama’s trip to Kenya, neither did I find time to see what he was up to.

I did my share of waiting to wave at dignitaries in the 1970s when we stood as pupils of Corona School by the railway line at Bukuru, Jos waving Nigerian flags at the convoy of Yakubu Gowon the then Head of State of Nigeria and his friend Gnassingbe Eyadema from Togo when they drove up to Yakubu Gowon’s homestead near Pankshin.

Besides, every Children’s Day, the 27^th of May, we went marching to the salute of the governor of Benue-Plateau, J. D. Gomwalk, really, I had had enough of that stuff.

Treating people differently

However, there were some things one could not miss about what Barack Obama said in Kenya, some brilliantly highlighted by the Independent.

Obama was always going to talk about gay rights, but he had a broader thing to say about rights which, unfortunately, was lost on his host.

“When you start treating people differently not because of any harm they are doing to anybody, but because they are different, that's the path whereby freedoms begin to erode. And bad things happen.”

He could not have said that in any simpler terms, to codify the treatment of people differently because of their difference in the law will not only erode the freedoms of those people, it sets the stage for eroding the freedoms of the next vulnerable group.

Missing the point totally

There is no doubt that there are many vulnerable, voiceless and somewhat powerless groups in Africa, women, children, girls, the poor, the sick, the indigent, the minority by tribe, religion or some other association, they are all in line for a form for erosion of their rights eventually, even if it does not seem obvious now.

Uhuru Kenyatta a few months younger than Barack Obama and son of Jomo Kenyatta who led the struggle for Kenyan independence said in response, ‘gay rights was "generally a non-issue" for most Kenyans’.

That sort of dismissiveness is dangerous makes you wonder about the allegations of culpability that led to ICC charges against Uhuru with regards to the post-election violence in 2007 to 2008.

How many other non-issues?

The question becomes how many other rights are generally a non-issue for most Kenyans? How many minority groups have had their freedoms eroded because they have become a non-issue, an insignificance, a nuisance, a distraction and are readily ignored because they do not matter?

For how long will the leadership of Kenya follow the inclination of the majority to the detriment of the minority who they are also elected to serve and protect?

It was a poor choice of words, but broadly the issue of gay rights in Africa has become a litmus test of what its leadership is ready to address progressively in the name of human rights.

We lost many opportunities

They have expended so much energy in promulgating anti-gay laws to persecute and prosecute people who are generally invisible and in the shadows whilst ignoring the critically important aspects of rights for women and children, national development, education, health and welfare for all.

In the meantime, the seriously disaffected who have already concluded that they are viewed as a non-issue to the majority, have found the comfort extremist Jihadist companionship to wreak the havoc of unspeakable terror all around Africa.

The non-issue talk is a mind-set, a rotten one at that, because it goes without saying that many who have resorted to terror would never have considered it pathway of protest or emancipation if those who were supposed to represent them listened, engaged, participated and contributed to their wellbeing that they did not feel they were a non-issue but were acknowledged, respected and included in the greater and laudable pursuit of being part of their nation for its good, its development and its progress.

In pursuing gays, we lost opportunities to improve the lives of, and consolidate progressive laws with respect to people we see daily who are affected the most by our inaction even if they support our actions against the minority of the different and the other.

Bucharest: Bearing right

Decision Time

This Easter, my holiday would already have been planned for me if the young man who so pressed me towards the end of last year to be the uncle of the day at his nuptials had kept in contact after he got another job.

I would have jetted over the Atlantic to Toronto, Canada and that will have been some adventure.

Much as I am a creature of habit, some good, others unmentionable, I felt more like going somewhere new and the choices were Krakow in Poland, Bucharest in Romania or Sofia in Bulgaria.

The limitations of flight connections within my SkyTeam Alliance partners’ preference of KLM and Air France online meant Bucharest won out.

Flights and hotels were easy to book and I determined the hotel had an airport shuttle service which I availed myself of.

Bearing right out of the hotel

I did not get to do as much as I would have liked on a first visit, but my hotel could not have been more central than it was. Calea Victoriei is an artery for a tourist's walk rather than for vehicular traffic than you walked from monument to museum to church to whatever else that seemed to have a road branching off leading to it.

On my way to the Old Town, I walked past the bust of Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern day Turkey, at a time in its history, Romania was part of the Ottoman Empire. In the Old Town, Old Court Museum with active excavation work ongoing was at one time the site of the court of Vlad the Impaler, his patronymic name was Dracula.

One legend I read, which I will not care to verify, because it makes such horrific reading was he arranged a banquet in his own honour and invited beggars, peasants and the destitute to it. Once they sat at the table, he had them surrounded and set fire to the building. This was his way of ridding his city of 'undesirables'.

In the evening, I went to Cismigiu Gardens, which had a lake, a grand house and for all the talk and the menace of stray dogs, now reduced to a tenth of the some 40,000 high had Bark Park, just like a children's play area, you could take your dog there to bark its vocal cords raw.

Grandiose beyond belief

Without much of a guide and the apparent unhelpfulness of the hotel concierge, I could not appreciate the sights as well as one should. The tour buses I was informed do not operate in the low season which extends to the end of April and I was not keen on a private taxicab tour.

Surveying the map at dinner I realised the Palace of the Parliament was a 15-minute walk away. It was one of Nicolae Ceaușescu’s grandest projects. It is second only to the Pentagon in size as the largest single building.

The chief architect, Anca Petrescu, was only 28 when she led the team of architects who designed this monstrosity that you can visit if you come along with you passport for a fee. However, this weekend there was a motorbike event in the grounds and I didn't really think it was worth the bother asking if I could go inside.

Another great Romanian lady

That will be the quest of another visit if and when I return to Bucharest. However, there was a lady, Ana Pauker, who was de-facto leader of Romania long before Ceaușescu, she was for while the Foreign Minister from 1947 to 1952 and she made the cover of the Times magazine as the most powerful woman in the world.

Sadly as the Politburo system of socialist and Communist governments work, keeping in favour is an inscrutable craft of power plays and Machiavellian politics, rivals got her labelled and discredited, having once survived breast cancer she was just allowed to become a translator at the end of her career. A relapse a few years on killed her.

South Africa: How to Get Away With Murder - Violence Against Women continues

Never forget the issue – It is Violence Against Women [UN]

Reeva Steenkamp and Anni Dewani - names of women, real people who by reason of the cases brought against their partners have been relegated to the background.

The perception is that, based on the case pursued by the prosecution against Oscar Pistorius and Shrien Dewani, these men have apparently walked off lightly from their involvement in the deaths of girlfriend and wife.

Reeva was the unfortunate victim of a killing, whether it was murder or homicide is up for discussion, Anni was the victim of a car-jacking murder in an alleged murder-for-hire scheme procured on her honeymoon by her husband. The fact is, two women are dead.

Not a crime until there is a victim

That Oscar was an irresponsible gun-nut prone to fits of rage was not in dispute and eventually we heard that Shrien was a closet hard-core homosexual who engaged in kinky sexual activity. None of this is by any means criminal, we have the right to pursue hobbies and fantasies to the limit as long as no one else comes to harm in the pursuit of such activities.

Where one this departs from the ordinary is when a man for whatever reason is terrified into thinking there is an intruder in his home and he fires 4 shots into an enclosed place unaware of who might be in there. In a cartoon, whoever might have been in the enclosed place will walk out as if the shots were just a shower of confetti, in real life, the consequence is grave, the person died, having been hit by three shots.

Where the prosecution failed

It was left to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that this act was intentional, failing that, at least prove irresponsibility, it failed and so Oscar Pistorius literally got a slap on the wrist for gun-toting wrist action that led to the death of an innocent woman who had the misfortune of being his girlfriend.

One cannot fault the case law from the perspective of the judge, it had on the balance of probabilities with a wily lawyer gotten the man off the hook for a more serious crime. However, the state has won the right to appeal the sentencing, we just have to watch this space for the new exegesis of the Latin descriptions of criminally causing the death of another.

A soap opera like a thriller

With hindsight, having learnt of the secret life of Shrien Dewani in England, Anni Hindocha of Sweden should never have been in any kind of matrimony with her husband.

One can assume that both were caught in the strictures of being third-culture kids; parents and relations from the Indian subcontinent, they being products of English and Swedish societies having to respect traditions.

It is probably why Shrien was in the closet living a double life of lascivious homosexual and eligible bachelor, a combustible mix of circumstances with Anni as the unfortunate collateral damage.

Where the prosecution failed again

According to the prosecution, having procured a false matrimony, the pull of the other life presented Shrien with situation that having fulfilled the cultural requirements demanded of him in the marriage ceremony now could terminate a union that should not proceed beyond the honeymoon.

Anni and Shrien made from South Africa for their honeymoon and there she was killed by people her husband presumably had interesting contacts with before the carjacking. Those people were prosecuted and jailed as Shrien returned to the UK and progressively played a grieving husband, a nervous wreck, an accused, a challenger to an extradition that lasted three years, an extradition to South Africa to face justice and now a free man.

Until proven broke, it seems

We are none the wiser about how the stories the other murder told against Shrien might have come about, the prosecution again having failed to raise its argument above the bar necessary to make Shrien face the charge of murder or at least the conspiracy to commit murder.

There are two immutable facts, the women are dead and the case law to test the allegations against boyfriend and husband who were lawyered up to well that it gives life to that thing that Alan Dershowitz once said on television. "Everyone is innocent until proven broke."

Can these failings continue?

More disturbingly is whether the prosecution has the nous, skill, empathy and conviction to make a convincing case against well-heeled men who purportedly have been involved in the deaths of their partners.

One cannot really put a finger on where it has gone completely awry, but 2014 cannot be said to have advanced the movement to stop Violence Against Women with these two high-profile cases in South Africa.

Though the prosecution will have a second bite of the cherry in revisiting the judgement against Oscar Pistorius, I do not think anyone is holding their breath about a radically different outcome.

In the case of Shrien Dewani, it is unlikely anyone would step forward with a hand in marriage lest they meet a similar fate, but having being conveniently outed, he might well get on with openly being a homosexual until some twist of fate allows for Anni Dewani to get some form of justice and her family some form of closure.

In both cases, I am saddened, Violence Against Women remains an everyday reality and it is unlikely victims of such violence will get a fair shake of the law in their favour.

C'est la vie.

Further Reading

Violence Against Women – Wikipedia

Hospital: Hepatic scrutiny

Situation to woman

I could remember the day I had a deep biopsy almost 4 years ago when the consultant dermatologist asked one of his understudies to probe the fungating cancer tumours in the ball of my foot and the second toe of my left foot.

The pain was already unbearable and otherworldly as the woman flooded my foot with injections of Lidocaine to no effect. After seven shots, I could still feel the raw pain of cancer, excruciating beyond what words could describe, but the biopsy had to be done.

So I laid on the gurney, a nurse holding one hand as if I was enacting a sketch of a woman in labour, she asked me to take deep breaths, though I did not have to push, I did ask for an epidural but none was offered.

In the end, I had some tissue folded into a big pad and put that between my jaws for the firmest bite force I could muster and gave in to the worst of the biopsy, which ended after 10 minutes.

Situation to ponder

I was in pain for another hour after that, it was one of the worst experiences I ever had in my life, but it was necessary to ascertain the type of cancer I had for them to determine the course of treatment.

Today, I was to have another experience that could easily have been happening to the other gender as I wondered aloud if it would be healthy and speculated about its gender, then remembered we do not gestate.

Before I knew it, someone was congratulating my wife and I; that left me in a rather tight corner before I stuttered my thanks and moved on swiftly ere I had to divulge too much about my warped thinking and complicated relationship arrangements or the lack of them.

Situation of liver

I was to have an ultrasound liver scan, and I really was not expecting a foetus to be kicking and grimacing in my belly.

Preparations for that meant drinking lots of water to have a full bladder and no food for at least 6 hours before the scan. I find water tasteless that I only got half of the two litres I was supposed to drink into my system.

I registered, and within minutes, the sonographer called my name, took me into a consulting room and then asked me to take my shirt off, sag my trousers before lying on the bed.

She applied some jelly to my belly and used the probe to rub it all over the exposed parts of my abdomen before I had to take a series of long deep breaths that I held for almost a minute before I was allowed to breathe normally again.

Situation is good

I could not see the scans as they allow women to see the ultrasound scans of their life foetuses, however, we did come up with the idea of projecting the scans onto the ceiling to keep patients entertained but that might not be possible under the NHS.

Turning onto my side, my arms raised above my head, she did more scans until she declared that my liver looks fine. Over time, I will continue to have blood tests and possible biannual scans – great relief and thankfulness, one cannot afford another major event for this day.

Opinion: Before the law, the veil is removed

Our open outlook

There are many reasons as a Western European I love living here even as a minority of many sorts. Despite the occasional negatives of racism, deprivation, inequality and much else, we as a people are probably still the most tolerant, accommodating, liberal and gregarious of all humanity.

That might be disputed but on the whole, we live and let live; very rarely do we impose our views on others and apart from populists and rabble-rousers for political gain, we are a peaceable people.

Garb and barb

However, over the last decade or so, our liberal democratic values of separation of religion and state to varying degrees have been challenged by the ingress of cultures, traditions, beliefs and attitudes that are not fundamentally what we might call our historical Western Judeo-Christian heritage – some have balked, but most have acquiesced, we make allowances, many allowances at that.

Recently, it has been about religious garb, the matter of coverings and modesty vary just as our interpretations of what constitutes those might differ depending on our beliefs and customs.

Germans for instance are not afraid of nudity, in fact, it is called, Freikörperkultur (FKK) which translates literally to Free Body Culture, it is a movement quite different from nudist sun-bathing and any other forms of public nudity, but that is a topic for another day. [Wikipedia]

To veil and to reveal

Yesterday, in the UK, we pussy-footed around the issue of the use of the full veil in relation to Islamic tradition when a lady appearing in court for a completely different issue of witness intimidation took us on a legal distraction as to whether she could appear in court fully veiled and never have the requirement to take it off. [BBC News]

The wisdom of judges must be commended when they give their opinions on these very sensitive issues, because in this case, the judge was accommodating of the lady to allow her wear her veil in court during the proceedings but that veil had to be removed when giving evidence.

Indeed, anyone who takes the witness box should only be accorded privacy and the possible invisibility for their safety and privacy as we do with minors, however that cannot be extrapolated on religious grounds to prevent an essential instrument of recognition and expression critical to jury observation and assessment, court is beyond just the hearing of words in answer to questions and cross-examination.

The visage of safety

The primary mode of identification for the elimination of doubt and the building of communal trust is the face as far as Western Europe is concerned, if you must access the public space for the convenience of the majority, which implicitly includes safety and security, the face must be visible.

We are conditioned to believe that a covered face is indicative of an assumed criminality, and whilst a religiously modest and pious woman might well be the most law-abiding citizen around, having a veiled face introduces an unnecessary threat, redefining our conditioning whilst it also can be exploited to ulterior ends – it is an unnecessarily difficult accommodation that we have to tolerate.

Dressed to digress

Back to Germany, it was a case of whether a girl could be allowed to wear the modest burkini if she were forced to attend compulsory swimming classes and then the extended religiously-tinged demand of her parents to prevent her splashing around with scantily clad boys in the pool. [Wikipedia][Economist]

Whilst, the burkini is almost too much dress short of a wetsuit with the attendant issues that do not need much exegesis, it is quite an accommodation redolent of our liberal and tolerant disposition to many cultures different from ours, we find it acceptable enough to not only condone it but accept it as wholesome and fashionable for those who choose to don that garb of presumed modesty.

Freedom and entitlement

However, judges found this accommodation that first could not exempt the girl from co-educational swimming classes which is the norm, by stating that, “the basic right of religious freedom does not confer any entitlement to be spared from encountering, at school, the behaviour of third parties... [behaviour] which is widely observed in daily life, outside school, at certain seasons.”

This construct should become both precedent and fundamental, because once again, the judges have identified the community of daily life as an unavoidable space of interaction available to the general public in which as human beings we are by choice allowed to participate and we cannot exclusively curtail that environment for the convenience of the few.

Freedom and allowance

The basic right of religious freedom is sacrosanct, you can practice it as fervently and fanatically as you will, but if you do not want to encounter the public in the observance of your beliefs, then the best accommodation we can afford is for you to absent yourself from that setting as a matter of right and privilege if of the age to exercise such a prerogative.

However, as a minor in Germany, where you must attend school and participate in activities that make up part of the curriculum, no entitlement is reserved to create exemptions to the point that each consideration if that situation arises creates disorder and chaos.

Adapt or depart

The broader point without stating it is the cliché - when in Rome, do as Romans do, and if you so feel that you cannot do as Romans do, the Romans should not have to change or adapt their Roman ways to your requirements as an entitlement, else they will no more be identified by their Roman ways, nevertheless, you having arrived in Rome might well find ways to adapt to what Romans do or extricate yourself from Roman influence by being in a recluse or leaving Rome entirely.

Beyond this, we must be concerned about the influx of ideas beyond the need for safety and security in the public space that informs the regulation of the public space by granting specific entitlements to certain persons, groups or beliefs which will curtail the freedoms and liberties we as a majority have for the satisfaction and accommodation of others.

The blunter point in terms of these conflicts of religious adherence that challenge the freedoms we all enjoy is that the law is finding better ways to say; adapt to your current environment and circumstances or depart to where those beliefs you so espouse have unquestioned currency.

Opinion: It's a Dress, NOT a YES

A crime beneath contempt

The focus went to India this week with protests against the gang-rape of a lady of 23 by six presumably drunken men on a bus as punishment for being out in the evening with a man.

She was repeated raped, beaten with rods and thrown off the bus, her companion was also attacked but that lady presently fights for her life.

There are many strands to this story that cannot be dealt with in the strictures of a blog; the cultural, the traditional, the economic, the social and the religious issues are myriad.

No excuse

However, there is one clear narrative that should be declared unassailable all around the globe - that there is no excuse acceptable in humanity and most especially in the 21^st Century that warrants the violation of another human-being in pursuit of some warped notion of deterrence or meting out of punishments to set society to rights.

In the first instance, drunkenness cannot  and must not excuse criminality, it is within the capabilities of people to control their use of alcoholic beverages and moderate the anti-social influences that might result from inebriation.

There is no reason for people to act in mob packs like animals, each one of those men should have and must have known that what they were doing was at first wrong and at best criminal but they might have for some sense of impunity assumed they could get away with their reprehensible acts.

Nothing corrective in rape

The strange entitlement syndrome that allows men to act as if there are society’s female policeman with the right to prejudge, accuse, charge, convict and punish our womenfolk is not only evident in what happened in India, it is pervasive all around the globe in the use of rape as a weapon of war, for the absurd correction of sexual preferences, for Neanderthal gratification without retribution and even for exacting an atrocious societal norm.

There is nothing corrective in rape and there is nothing whatsoever that can place rape in the ambit of anything legally justifiable under any circumstances, no matter how sententious you want to be.

The strange of strangers

That it could be a complete stranger’s business who a lady decides to go out with at any time of the day is bizarre on the face of it.

That the stranger will then act to not just challenge the lady but violate her as if they are acting in the office of society’s disciplinarian for moral infractions beggars belief in the extreme but we see this in too many places and society has been lethargic in rising up against these patently human rights violations.

Even in Nigeria

In the capital city of Nigeria, Abuja, the Abuja Environmental Protection Board has taken on the vile task of corralling any female found in town after a certain hour and branding them prostitutes.

A government organisation suddenly turned vice-squad and moral police that would shame even extreme religious fundamentalists with their egregious abuse of woman rights on the premise that they are keeping the city clean.

Even so

There is no doubt that we all want some standard of morals and modesty on our streets but it is not a licence to exact punitive measures outside the law and in violation of human rights because someone does not conform to our moral standards or prejudicial interpretations of religious texts to dehumanise, persecute, prosecute and censure others.

There is still a principle to abide by – Live and let live.

Remember this

In ending, I remember watching the news yesterday and two placards stood out in the Indian protests.

It’s a dress, not a Yes – This is probably the most succinct protest against rape under the excuse of supposedly indecent dressing.

Don’t teach our girls how to dress, teach our boys not to rape – I will rewrite that in a most categorical declaration – Teach our boys never to rape, whatever the circumstances.

Burning Up The Rapist's Manual

This is my contribution to 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence Say No – Unite to end violence against women.

Loving rape

This topic always gets to me and it has become one of the ones I have returned to write about again and again.

The issue is rape but worse still, it is the justification of rape by reason of what some might call indecent, ungodly, improper or provocative dressing.

This school of thinking that included an Attorney General in Nigeria suggests that the rape victim is almost entirely responsible for their rape because their dressing provoked the rapist to act uncontrollably such that the rapist had to satisfy the jungle animal lust presented by sighting a provocatively dressed object of desire.

Animals, we are not

I could well agree if this happened amongst animals but out there in the jungle animals are not in clothes and essentially they are not human-beings.

In fact, even in communities where nudity exists as a matter of course, I doubt those societies violate the bodies of each other without consent, as human-beings we are civilised and one element of civilisation is self-restraint in the face of serious provocation.

We are equal

Another issue I want to address is that of relationships between men and women in society. From a moral standpoint there is a tendency to dehumanise and objectify our womenfolk with the idea that the male gender collectively and individually automatically have lien over all women to such an extent that men believe they should have control on all issues that affect women.

That is why we still have to content with issues of rights, rape, abortion, trafficking, abuse, harassment, dressing, mutilations and much else with the law almost giving perpetrators the licence of impunity without consequence.

Women have rights

I contend that beyond the primary sphere of influence if there be one that subscribes to the primitive view of the inequality of the sexes, the woman out in the street minding her own business in whatever state of dress she might be in is in her own right an individual, equal before the law and she should be able to make the decisions she deems fit for how she presents anywhere she have the right to be at.

We cannot because we are men attempt to control every woman as if we are husband, father, son, brother, nephew or relation to suit some preconceived notion of some play being honour and dishonour requiring violent sanction.

No licence to violate

Basically, no man by nature, by law or by divine instruction has acquired the right and licence to violate another person for whatever purposes they might want to use to justify that heinous act. This applies to rape, sexual abuse, physical violence or harassment and we need to address whatever allows us to condone any violation forthwith.

In a series of tweets that I have collated into a Storify titled The Rapist’s Manual, the total sum of my compelling argument is found in this tweet - Let me as categorical as I can ever be. There can NEVER EVER be any grounds or mitigating circumstances for rape.

If I were to leave my readers with one analogy framed in a question it would be this – If a woman is responsible for her rape because of her indecent dressing, are you responsible for an armed robber pointing a gun at you?

Further Reading

A Hard Look At Violence Against Women – The Resurgence

3 commissioners suspended for improper dressing in Ebonyi State, Nigeria

Violence Against Women Online Resources

Opinion: Miracle Cures and Against Religious Abuse of the Vilest Kind

Where I stand

There are some things are really get me seriously agitated and they pertain to rights and abuse. In the body of work I have produced over almost 9 years, I think these particularly stand out - human rights, injustice, child rights, women’s rights, sexuality rights, child sexual abuse, sexual violence, cultural and religious abuse.

There is no doubt that I also cover very controversial issues; it is just my nature to tackle those as passionately and objectively as I can.

Too vile for words

This morning I found myself on a Twitter soapbox dealing with religious abuse of the vilest kind. A church had concocted a cocktail of fruit juice and olive oil then marketed it as a cure for cancer or HIV; the prayer component of the product making up about 50% of the price.

People with chronic and terminal illnesses are desperately in need of succour and hope; they are vulnerable to the machinations of those who portend to offer palliation or cures for their ailments.

Hope like greed is easily exploited and nowhere is that best manipulated than in churches where the leaders with ethereal provenance and esoteric rituals that could border on the macabre but pass off as spiritual hold sway.

Your church as a ghetto

These churches serve as both communities and places of worship but the community aspect almost turns the congregants into members of a ghetto that project practices very different from the wider communities in which they exist. Like Nigerians in the United Kingdom doing only Nigerian things.

People need to feel comfortable wherever they go but to be exploited in this way is unforgivable.

There should be a number of inalienable facts that people should have when attending these churches which on closer scrutiny are more like sepulchres of despair engaged in commercial activity for the aggrandisement of the church leaders.

Rather than minister to their flock, their flock ministers to their every greedy need for ostentation and hedonism which they suggest are the fruits of service to God – they are not shepherds but wolves conducting assemblies with grandiloquent names that will be redolent of B-movie thrillers.

Miracles are free

Now, miracles do exist, but never for a fee, the best example of a miracle was when Jesus raised Lazarus who was 4-days dead petrifying and decomposing in a tomb for free. Neither did he charge for converting water into wine at the wedding feast where one would have expected at best a donation. It is implausible that those ministering in the name of Jesus will then demand some payment directly, by gimmickry or through the sale of potions to offer healing to those still alive but with terminal illnesses. Miracles are free, every time and always.

People should be very lucid about the function of the church and the function of medicine. They are not mutually exclusive. Using medicine is not a sign of the lack of faith; in fact faith and medicine can make the medicine more efficacious.

My testimony is that I had cancer and went on chemotherapy, according to the oncologist and nurses that came daily to dress the cancer lesions, it took up to six months for lesions as mine to dry up and disappear, but in my case, the lesions were all gone in 8 weeks. The doctors considered my response to medication and the result miraculous.

The church and healing

The church should not replace your hospital neither should your pastor replace your doctor. They have their roles. If your pastor does say to you, you are healed; you have the right to a second opinion, a medical opinion to confirm you are healed.

In all cases where Jesus healed lepers, He told them to go and show themselves to the priests, this, I believe was to fulfil all righteousness as they’ll say in religious parlance – or commonly, to ensure all boxes were ticked to allow their re-admittance into society.

Ultimately, if you are paying for any treatment and it is not to a professionally accredited medical practitioner, to a hospital or to a pharmacy for medicine, you have been swindled by a confidence trickster impostor masquerading as a pastor when they are in fact no better than bush witchdoctors.

Your pastor is not your doctor

Your pastor should have nothing against the use of doctors, hospitals or medicine, not everyone exercises feats of faith that at an instant will manifest as lightning bolt miraculous cures. Any assurance of healing should include the advice to have the medically competent confirm the change in physiology indicating healing – it is NOT a sin to do so.

As I have written many times before, never ever discontinue your medication without first consulting your doctor and only on the advice of the doctor and no other. If the pastor did not prescribe your medication the pastor does not have the authority or capacity tell you to discontinue your medicine – do not had your pills over to be destroyed as if you are attending a magician’s show – medications should be properly disposed of by pharmacies or given back to hospitals to be used by those less fortunate than yourself.

Beware!

Just be wary of those who take advantage of you in the religious space, demanding always but never giving, selling goods and snake oil remedies not independently validated by the authorities and whose rituals defy explanation whilst not informing of other reasonable choices or options you should have in this amazing vibrant world we live in today.

Source

Church slammed for selling blackcurrant cordial and olive oil drink as a 'miracle cure' for cancer and HIV : Mail Online