![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(NEWS) Today's Cultural Warfare Update
Nov. 26th, 2005 10:10 amShort update today; most of them actually have taken the long weekend off, yay.
I've been thinking of writing up an article about this whole effort to force retailers, via boycotts and other pressure, to use 'Merry Christmas' - and specifically not use 'Happy Holidays' or other language inclusive of other holidays and other religions. There is a point to discuss, aside from the obvious one of THANKS FOR TRASHING THE HOLIDAY SPIRIT, ASSHOLES.
I personally am starting to wonder, when I see 'Merry Christmas' posted, whether that's a political statement. Or, if it's not one they'd have preferred to make, whether they've given in to fundamentalist pressure. Most of the time, intellectually, I know it's not - particularly not around here, where fundamentalist strength is low. But, I still wonder.
I never used to think things like that. But now in the second year of CHRISTMAS CHRISTMAS UBER ALLES, I'm starting to.
I'm not a Christian. I'm also not an athiest. But I've never minded "Merry Christmas," and I always thought that people who would get bitchy about that really needed to get lives. Most Americans identify as Christian. They've got a big holiday this time of year. I like the lights very much; they're pretty, and I always go on walks to look at the displays.
Sure, the assumption of Christianity is a little annoying sometimes, but not so much as to make that big a deal out of it, and National Jews and Pagans Go to the Movies Day is pretty fun too. "Merry Christmas" a bother? Not hardly.
Now, though, it's starting to be, because they've decided to make it one. Because they're out there threatening people who want to be a little more inclusive in their marketing, and telling them to stop. It's not just "you must use Merry Christmas;" it's "you must not use anything else, either." (Concerned Women for America has specifically talked, and I've quoted them verbatim in these updates, about companies "trying to have it both ways." The demand is for "Merry Christmas" only.) Aside from the high hypocrisy of fundamentalist Christians using the annual retail shopping orgy to demand exclusive recognition of the religion they've pretty much distorted out of all recognisability, it's the injection of organised fundamentalist boot-stomping that upsets me.
It's the demand to hang the Christian sign in the window, lest they do their best to ruin you. It's the demand to fall in, to live as they want, to obey their will here, too, as in everything else. They've been saying not to market to queers for a while, mostly because that acknowledges we exist. Now, apparently, don't market to Jews or atheist or neopagans or anyone else who has a holiday now either, because that's "banning Christmas."
It's Christianity only, by order of of them. And when I see that, now, I wonder whether somebody's company has decided to fall in to line, to walk away from everyone else in favour of the dominionist fuckhead demand of the week. And I do resent that.
And now, the news.
This just kind of amused me - Focus on the Family's approved bibles list. They'll take nonliteral translations, they'll take cultural paraphrases - but only as long as they are not paraphrased in such a way as to make them not "gender specific" in rhetoric; "man" should be used, and not "human"; in almost all cases, male pronouns should be used; in cases where the gender in rhetoric is not male, "one" or "a person" can be used. In no cases listed should female pronouns be used. Also, there's apparently one out there which is abbreviated NirV, which is close enough to NERV that I luled;
Arizona Concerned Women for America "gears up" for anti-marriage, anti-civil-unions ballot initiative;
American Family Association claims they are hurting Target's holiday sales with their boycott;
Christian Civic League of Maine gears up for legislative push after popular defeat in their ballot attempt to overturn Maine's GBLT civil protections law;
Fundamentalist and conservative Christian leaders urge hard line against gayfolk.
( Articles, links, and excerpts )
I've been thinking of writing up an article about this whole effort to force retailers, via boycotts and other pressure, to use 'Merry Christmas' - and specifically not use 'Happy Holidays' or other language inclusive of other holidays and other religions. There is a point to discuss, aside from the obvious one of THANKS FOR TRASHING THE HOLIDAY SPIRIT, ASSHOLES.
I personally am starting to wonder, when I see 'Merry Christmas' posted, whether that's a political statement. Or, if it's not one they'd have preferred to make, whether they've given in to fundamentalist pressure. Most of the time, intellectually, I know it's not - particularly not around here, where fundamentalist strength is low. But, I still wonder.
I never used to think things like that. But now in the second year of CHRISTMAS CHRISTMAS UBER ALLES, I'm starting to.
I'm not a Christian. I'm also not an athiest. But I've never minded "Merry Christmas," and I always thought that people who would get bitchy about that really needed to get lives. Most Americans identify as Christian. They've got a big holiday this time of year. I like the lights very much; they're pretty, and I always go on walks to look at the displays.
Sure, the assumption of Christianity is a little annoying sometimes, but not so much as to make that big a deal out of it, and National Jews and Pagans Go to the Movies Day is pretty fun too. "Merry Christmas" a bother? Not hardly.
Now, though, it's starting to be, because they've decided to make it one. Because they're out there threatening people who want to be a little more inclusive in their marketing, and telling them to stop. It's not just "you must use Merry Christmas;" it's "you must not use anything else, either." (Concerned Women for America has specifically talked, and I've quoted them verbatim in these updates, about companies "trying to have it both ways." The demand is for "Merry Christmas" only.) Aside from the high hypocrisy of fundamentalist Christians using the annual retail shopping orgy to demand exclusive recognition of the religion they've pretty much distorted out of all recognisability, it's the injection of organised fundamentalist boot-stomping that upsets me.
It's the demand to hang the Christian sign in the window, lest they do their best to ruin you. It's the demand to fall in, to live as they want, to obey their will here, too, as in everything else. They've been saying not to market to queers for a while, mostly because that acknowledges we exist. Now, apparently, don't market to Jews or atheist or neopagans or anyone else who has a holiday now either, because that's "banning Christmas."
It's Christianity only, by order of of them. And when I see that, now, I wonder whether somebody's company has decided to fall in to line, to walk away from everyone else in favour of the dominionist fuckhead demand of the week. And I do resent that.
And now, the news.
This just kind of amused me - Focus on the Family's approved bibles list. They'll take nonliteral translations, they'll take cultural paraphrases - but only as long as they are not paraphrased in such a way as to make them not "gender specific" in rhetoric; "man" should be used, and not "human"; in almost all cases, male pronouns should be used; in cases where the gender in rhetoric is not male, "one" or "a person" can be used. In no cases listed should female pronouns be used. Also, there's apparently one out there which is abbreviated NirV, which is close enough to NERV that I luled;
Arizona Concerned Women for America "gears up" for anti-marriage, anti-civil-unions ballot initiative;
American Family Association claims they are hurting Target's holiday sales with their boycott;
Christian Civic League of Maine gears up for legislative push after popular defeat in their ballot attempt to overturn Maine's GBLT civil protections law;
Fundamentalist and conservative Christian leaders urge hard line against gayfolk.
( Articles, links, and excerpts )
