The caveat here is that even that example is not remotely cut and dry. Religion is still very slow to any sort of change that colours outside the lines of its doctrine.
Probably commenting a little late but here are my thoughts:
Not everyone is educated.
Some people are raised with a certain set of beliefs that are never challenged because their friends and family agree that that is the right way to think. It’s only when you expand your group and meet others from more diverse backgrounds or do some actual research that you begin to realise that perhaps your beliefs shouldn’t be set in stone. However, this isn’t always the case because:
Not everyone is open to being contradicted.
I’ve argued with people who find it incredibly difficult to accept an alternative viewpoint and I have to say, close-mindedness is not limited to one side of the political spectrum. It’s like talking to a brick wall sometimes because no matter what you say, if they don’t agree with you, they will shut out the information you’re giving them.
Even when you think you’re woke, you’re still not woke enough.
Because what is seen as socially acceptable changes. Because everyone is still learning and you might think you’re aware of all that is wrong in the world but there is still more out there to know. And you may or may not change your mind about what you support or don’t support in the future.
It’s easier to be ‘woke’ about things which directly affect you.
People are more likely to say, yes this type of discrimination is happening because I’ve been on the receiving end of this discrimination. A lot of narrow minded people who don’t experience or witness something end up thinking, well maybe that isn’t real because it doesn’t affect them or really concern them personally.
I’ve noticed that denominations that have a religious figure head are slower to change, which is strange because you’d assume the fact that they have a ‘living prophet’ would give them more room to change things.
I think in a way I agree. It’s easier to convert poor people for instance (I’m looking at all the mormon and Jehovah witness missions in africa ) because it gives them hope and purpose, and because of this they have more stake in the religion and are more active and fundamental than richer folks who tend to be less active and lax.
Absolutely. One need look no further than the prosperity gospel and who its primarily marketed towards. I will say that one thing that’s always impressed me about religion is its ability to keep people sane in the shadow of immense hardship, but the other face of the coin is how that can be manipulated by very human people claiming to speak for a divine being.
I mean deification is a powerful tool for centralising an idea. I mean look at the aftermath of pro-Black awareness and conversation following Nipsey Hussle’s death within Black American communities.
Ah, the love of comfort. I just had to pull it out because I feel it spans so many different sections.
Not necessarily. Remember religion, as we know it today, is a system. Its very different from the indigenous spiritual systems. The living head of the religion if anything just helps to reinforce what is already there in my view. To me, it’s not even about whether there is a head or not but rather you have to look at how the machinery was constructed in the first place. Look at its origins and various changes throughout time.
For example. Catholicism is a lot more conservative than it once was. Small example. In churches now, the symbol of pentagram would be seen as a pagan/occult symbol deemed unwelcome to the church but prior to that, it was a once accepted symbol relating to the five wounds of christ. Also, I think a large factor also relates to who you are or where you are standing in that church with respect to change.
This. This is probably the most powerful tool of all. When someone or something is deified rather than the members recognizing the divinity within them you create followers and not leaders and it doesn’t really promote an environment for “wokeness” in that sense because there are so many mental constructs throughout that organization to challenge depending on how rigid the structure is.
Hmm, as an Ex catholic I can tell you that Catholicism is a conservative as who ever is currently pope, bishop etc is conservative.
Pope Francis talks taking in immigrants, and talking about ‘Being gay is not a sin, but the action is’ has kind of laxed some folks on their overt anti-gay stance.
Pope Paul VI called birth control ‘Intrinsically Wrong’ 50 years ago and Catholics (might depend on where they are) still think using birth control is a sin.
It’s not as bad as how Mormon’s take their prophet’s words as doctrine, but there’s a reason Catholics call Popes ‘His Holiness.’ They’re held to very high spiritual regard.
Huh, this is a good point.
This is one interesting thread
My 2 cents is that some people genuinely care about wokeness but some people use it for show. A prime example is when influencer will “drag” and “cancel” a brand with a poor foundation shade range but still buy their products…
You’re right on that and I should have elaborated that I think the image keeps changing, but do you think its more them being “woke” or more about the organization adapting to the socio political climate of the day?
Economically(this is not my specialty so forgive me) I think wealthy folk know far better how money works as opposed to those who are less fortunate so between the rich and the poor there is a whole different culture. Rich folks know the money game so they cannot be approached in the same manner. Maybe it’s just me seeing the system as an overarching medium of control.
I do think education has set folks apart in terms of how the are approached. Note I am not saying that there aren’t wealthy folks heavily involved in churches. I’m just trying to look at their involvement vs the wider poorer demographic and how the two are approached.
Do the traditional spiritual beliefs in Trinidad have a central figure? Xhosa ancestral worship doesn’t, and while its practicable in isolation, its heavily reliant on cultural immersion to thrive.
Ah yes, performative progressives. You’ll also note the ratio of people doing this who are outside the affected community and who never use their platform to elevate the people they are supposedly “championing”.
There’s also the factor that, as underrepresented voices within consumer spheres become more vocal, progressive attitudes increasingly become more profitable, and those in a position to capitalise tend to be hypervisible brands. That hypervisibility can give a false sense of how things are truly progressing (some people think that Gilette ad means the world’s a year away from completely dismantling patriarchy when in fact). Those who know, know, but… you know.
So very true. Very good point.
Not really to my knowledge. At least not in the same way you might think of the pope. I mean take for instance we have a yoruba community here but whenever they get media coverage to speak on things I usually see many people. Some may be more popularly seen, but I can’t say I’ve seen one man/woman authority. It is very culturally immersive. So much so, it isn’t unheard of to have Yoruba systems mix with Hinduism (as east Indians are a huge branch here as well)
I have a feeling it has to do with keeping the pews filled and falling under social pressure.
The Mormon prophet put in a ban ‘made by God’ banning the Baptism of children of Gay parents in 2015. This 2019 they pulled an ‘lol, God didn’t mean it’ after heavy backslash and revoked the ban.
Also, Evangelicals in the USA do sometimes say the reason Catholics are more pro immigration than them is that immigrants from Latin America are mostly Catholic. Which makes sense.
lol. Organizations like need to the two M’s. Minds and Money. One can’t go without the other so its along the lines of what i’m thinking. The social climate has so much more power it can make a group adapt itself to a more pleasing image. And as Milo said, there may even be an incentive for underrepresented voices to be acknowledged. So the image can appear to be welcoming when at its core the group has never changed. This is how in my own little opinion how I feel most large religious bodies are. To maintain longevity especially in these times you can’t seem rigid and unchanging.
as a leader, Pope francis institutes a lot of soft power tactics which is far different from sometimes the blatant radical denouncements the mormon church does in comparison.
Because expecting everyone to gradually assimilate into one particular political ideology is unrealistic. It might never succeed.
Most evolutionary psychology is based on a false conception of what the past was like, anyways.
too many posts? Why is that even a rule
Yup, my whole qualm with it is that it relies too heavily on unproven evidence to explain away human behavior.
Especially since it implies humans haven’t evolved psychologically since the Stone age
I read the topic and I was going to scroll by until I read the comments. My main reason for scrolling by was because I knew that it would depict and personify the ignorance that embodies the minds of so many of us today. The world is not “woke” is due to the fact that we simply don’t love. Someone mentioned “religious nut jobs” but in all fairness it was Jesus that mentioned to love unconditionally regardless of one’s views, actions, and etc. Politics are ran by humans. The world is made up of so many different individuals. Therefore it is best to leave the judging to God. When we become the judge, jury, and executioner is when we dispatch out venom and hate.
I’m only recognising the common denominator, which doesn’t appear to be whiteness, it appears to be education and economics. As you’ve said, people with more money can afford better lawyers and people who are educated are probably deemed less likely to reoffend.