Author: Anna

The overall message that Solanas has is that men are the lesser sex, and that men have to keep women down because they want to be women and if women start living up to their potential they will realize men are useless and get rid of them. This is why men have created things like social expectations, economics, patriarchy, etc.

She also has some frankly bizarre views on the psychology of men, saying that men love death because they are already dead inside, and that all men want to be women, and the only men who SCUM should generally accept are the ones that embrace the fact that they are less then women and accept that they want to be women.

She essentially takes the sexism that women have faced for centuries and flips it, claiming that women are better and men are lesser and that the sexism we face is actually a construction to hide this fact.

Additionally, her writing is just not all that good, and she doesn’t really back up any of her arguments, just stating them as fact and ranting about it further. Her organization is also a little strange to me.

This museum is incredibly well thought out and well executed. This topic is very serious, and I think the museum created an atmosphere that made people aware of this even if they didn’t know much about it, and if you didn’t know about it, you would learn a lot about it by the time that you left that day.

Going through the permanent exhibition, which covers three floors, you really begin to grasp a level of the severity of everything that happened in the holocaust. You could easily spend upwards of an hour on each floor just taking in all of the information and reflecting on it all. They had videos of survivors playing, describing their experiences, instalations showing the shoes of people from camps, images explaining how the chambers worked, and more. Every section of the museum was utilized to show people the extent of what the Nazi’s did and how many people were affected by their actions.

There’s no possible way someone could understand what went on but this museum allows people to grieve and remember the people who suffered in this tragedy.

A lot of the context for this book is actually in the book. Hitler decided to write down his views while in prison (which he was supposed to be in for 5 years, but actually got out in less than a year) and he turned it into a long autobiographical explanation on how he hates Jewish people and how the Aryan Germans were superior to all. He explains how he got all of these viewpoints in his own writing, citing the newspapers he read in his youth.

Uncomfortably, his book is still printed and sold today to a degree that is frankly unsettling. After the war the copyright claim was given to the Bavarian government in an attempt to stop its spread in any way, but regrettably and predicatably, versions and translations still got out. People online for years have passed it around and many people alive still agree with his beliefs, I see a lot of this in America especially, and it’s very disconcerting to see how disconected from reality these people are (because they must be to agree with Hitler – especially this book, which in my opinion calls more to why you shouldn’t trust anything he said, because it is incredibly poorly organized and unnecessarily long winded.)

Mein Kampf is a long series of rambles that restate the same points over and over again.

I didn’t expect much going into this text, but wow was it hard to read. I think I spent at least an hour reading the same five points he had on how he managed propaganda for his organization– the gist was just that there are some people who were meant to be followers and there are people who are able to become members of an organization. Propoganda is meant for followers, and members people had to manually bring in.

See what I just did, was explain in two sentences, what he spent like 20 pages on. How you might ask? Because I don’t feel the need to keep explaining this point 40 more times after you already understand it.

Maybe this is because he did more speeches than writing, and because people couldn’t go back and relisten to the words he just said like you can with reading, but I don’t care, because I wasted hours of my life reading this man talk about propaganda for many pages with some irrelevant biggoted comment mixed in once per paragraph.

Overall, I hated reading this, thank you for reading.

The Protocols are known as one of the most impactful texts of antisemitism, despite their poor foundation and baffling origin

The Protocols was a series of works claiming to be a collection of minutes taking at various meetings held in Switzerland that depicted and explained how ALL Jewish people were planning to destroy christian society and how they planned to accomplish it. This text however, was a plagerism of two works, Biarritz by Hermann Goedsche and Dialogue between Machiavelli and Montesquieu in Hell by Maurice Joly, both of which direct excerpts have been identified from which the creator of this work took.

The protocols was proved to be fraudulent in the 1920’s by multiple newspapers, despite this, parts of this text was taught in schools in Nazi Germany as if it was real. In fact, many of the leading Nazi’s were aware of this text’s invalidity, but most still believed in the “Inner Truth” of the text. For example, Joseph Goebbel said “I believe that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a forgery. That is not because the worldview of Jewish aspirations expressed therein are too utopian or fantastic—one sees today how one point after the other of The Protocols is being realized—but rather because I do not think the Jews are so completely stupid as not to keep such important protocols secret. I believe in the inner, but not the factual, truth of The Protocols,” the inner truth being that Jewish people were somehow planning world domination.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion consists with a bunch of the same antisemetic points that are still made today. It’s honestly incredibly worrying that its been 100 years and somehow people are still jsut regurgitating the same insane points. This bizarre idea that Jewish people are going to take over the world by manipulating the media and economy is as if taken out of a cartoon plot. Then it goes on about how the only people able to keep this secret society of evil Jewish people at bay are the upperclass Christians, as if they’re the heroes of this bizzare fantastical delusion.

The saddest thing about reading this text is you can’t even really brush it off as complete nonsense, because while it honestly is all obviously fake and stupid, people really believe this stuff. People have been quoting and referencing this text as if it’s a credible source for the past 100 years. Even some people know these meetings the text claims to have occured are fake yet still give this idea of world domination credit.

Even some of the fears this text speaks on are understandable and connectable to modern day issues: Corrupt governments and the control of the upper one percent are highly understandable concerns for a modern day person. Obviously these issues aren’t caused by the evil secret Jewish organization that controls all the banks and press, but the actual issue being touched on isn’t outlandish like the “cause” the text suggests.

Overall the text is an obvious attempt at fear mongering, manipulating readers into believing the cause of all their and their contries problems is this puppeteering organization of Jews and I find it hard to take seriously, but regretfully, I know I have to, because some people really fall for this type of stuff.

Marquis de Sade was an eighteenth century french writer, his most notable work is 120 days. Marquis de Sade wrote this book on pieces of smuggled parchment while imprisoned in the Bastille. This wasn’t just the work of a depraved man wanting to get his rocks off, he was fully aware of the disgust his writing would bring.

Something I find extremely interesting about Marquis De Sade however, was his uncle. The Abbe De Sade – though I could find very little on him – was noted to be a Libertine and a Priest. This is extremely interesting to me because its kind of an oxymoron, especially for the time period: a priest is a man of god, who shouldn’t be tempted by things like physical pleasure, while a Libertine is someone who advocates for sexual freedom and believes that societal morals shouldn’t hold back physical pleasure. The Abbe De Sade, Paul Aldonse de Sade, took care of Marquis de Sade when he was 4 and a half and stayed with him at least partially until he was ten and sent off to school — according to what I could find in “Sade: A biography,” by Maurice Lever (1993), the Marquis’ father sent him there as he was spoiled by his aunts and grandmother, “He was a marvel, a miracle, an idol whose every whim was indulged. Knowing this, the apprentice tyrant asked for everything and got it, only to become more unbearable than ever” (page 52), and his father believed that the only way to control him would be for him to have a masculine authority figure. The Abbe also kept a library, of which he had a hidden collection of “licentious literature” (page 57) that the Marquis de Sade reportedly had found and taken interest in: including a book on Flagellation that also refered to “pleasure through suffering.” The Abbe was also reported to have had many supposed affairs even after becoming a priest, including but not limited to: a mother and daughter who lived with him, a maid, and a proprietress of a tavern – it is also mentioned that the Abbe was found with a prostitute in May 1762, who had the last name Dieu – which is very ironic given he was a priest (page 58).

It’s very clear that the behavior and paraphernalia of Marquis De Sade’s uncle heavily affect the way the Marquis thought growing up and while there are many other reasons as to why the Marquis turned out the way he did, I just found the influence of his Uncle to be very interesting and probably very crucial to his upbringing, especially given that he was so young when under the Abbe’s care.

(Anna S.)

Why write this? Why read this? Why put ME through the torture of reading this? Why of all works was this preserved for people to read?

All are very good questions I will never want the full answer to–mainly the first one.

While there are actually notable things within the work, such as the symbolism of the characters, or the veiws Sade gives on the church, overall, the work is essentially everything wrong with the world described in about five pages of actually somewhat notable commentary scrambled and mixed in amoungst over 300 pages of torture, rape, and murder.

Once you read something horrific, you think, it can’t get worse than that, it immediatly gets worse. On page 76 you read the phrase ” I had just turned 7″ and proceed to read a scene i honestly would feel sick describing. And you would be wrong if you think that’s the worst it can be, because a few pages later, it gets significantly worse.

I admit, I never finished, nor will I ever, because it was ultimately so disgusting I couldn’t even read what I did read in order. There is quite literally nothing you could possibly do to make me sit down and read this book for more than a page at a time due to the sheer horror the words in it create.

Amongst the kidnappings and objectification of women and children, the descriptions of ways to torture women to death ( including but not limited to stretching their limbs until they rip appart, leaving them for flies to eat, and melting one’s brains with a red hot iron ‘bonnet’), the explicit amount of detail given about acts committed against actual children, and the uncomfortable amount of human excrement, this book has ensured that I will never (and I mean never) read anything worse, so on the bright side at least I have found what I now consider the deepest low of writing in the history of ever.

While the text is said to not be very credible, and is missing over half of the initial text, I think the text we do have is very interesting.

Mary being a teacher to the apostles here is fascinating to me, she is essentially preaching to them, something that is often argued about amongst different denominations. The actual premise of her, as a woman, discussing theology is very controversial for the time period. Even the Apostles say this, Peter and Andrew directly claiming that they believe she must be lying, and that these concepts are hard to believe coming from her.

Another thing I found interesting was when Jesus said, “How wonderful you are for not wavering when seeing me!” He’s almost refreshed at the idea that Mary so clearly has told him she saw him, happy that she doesn’t waver at his presence and is completely accepting of his words and willing to follow them and think further on them so that she may understand when she does not. This is contrasted with the deciples, who are distressed earlier when he gives them knews that they cannot comprehend, and need Mary to encourage them so that they might think more about what his words meant.

Furthermore, I wonder why the text was hidden in the first place, if it is not credible like people claim, then what reason would there be for it to be hidden away? I’m not going to speculate more though, because I’m sure I could find the speculation of people more knowledgeable on the topics of religion and lost literature than me and it would probably be more accurate or detailed than anything I could come up with.

(Anna S.)

Throughout the Gospel of Judas, there is a significant separation of those who are human and those who are holy, from the beginning of the text Jesus laughs at his apostles actions, saying they do not pray of their own will, but due to the fact that it is how God is praised. Then he continues to tell them that there is no way they will ever truely know him.

He immediately establishes himself as someone beyond them, out of reach, and claims that their actions are only done to show that they are followers of God. Later on he tells them they are not able to see the holiest generation, telling them no mortal is strong enough to do so. Christian teachings, at least the ones that I have been told, always welcome people, and say that anyone who believes in God and repents for their sins is welcomed in heaven, so the idea that mortals would not be able to ascend is very strange to me.

Overall reading through this gospel is almost jarring, the gnostic messages and the behavior of Jesus is condescending at times, he speaks as if their efforts are in vain, almost mocking them when they are upset by his statements. It’s obviously faked and not even convincing due to the general views going against what Jesus actually preached.

A lot of this text confused me, as I was raised in a athiest household with little to no religious discussion, so much of the metaphors and phrases likely went over my head, but overall it just appeared strange compared to the limited knowledge I have on Christian scripture and practice.

(Anna S.)

The kind of satirical overexageration used in A Modest Proposal is incredibly amusing to me. The speaker is an extreme exageration of a protestant upperclass individual in Ireland judging their countries poor for their state of living. Reading through it honestly made me giggle, like, he’s not just being like “lets eat the poor peoples babies,” he’s like, “Lets have the poor people raise their kids for a year, encourage mothers to compete over who can produce the fatest, best tasting baby, the cook and eat them as a delicacy which will also promote tourism, and then also while we’re at it we could also take the skin and make some fine leather gloves,” and you’re just reading this like, “Sir who are you?” Once you get to the end, the speaker reveals that he “couldn’t benefit from this” because his wife is past the age of child bearing and his oldest child is nine, and hes only proposing this for “the betterment of his country,” but really, thats just like saying, “Hey this doesn’t affect me at all I just thought I’d open my mouth.”

Yes this is satirical, I know, but like, how long did this man sit and think about this? What do his early drafts look like? Mr. Swift how much did you think of that didn’t make it into the final copy? Jonathan Swift really put all of his brain power into creating a 5 page essay likening the way poor people are told “Just get a job and sell some of you valuables then maybe you could afford food” to being told to eat their young.

It’s a great commentary on the struggles of the poor in Ireland during the early 1700’s, as well as the lack of empathy or care parliament had, but also, the entire text is completely ridiculous and it makes me giggle.

The Gospel of Mary of Magdala was declared blasphemy by the church in the early 1800’s. This is not the first time nor the last that Mary’s story and her identity would be warped to fit the patriarchal standards and normalities of the Church. In the early years of the Church Mary of Magdala was portrayed as a prostitute, she was slandered and looked down upon within the teachings of the gospel. While some may believe this story, it is more likely that Mary of Magdala, due to her closeness to Jesus Christ, was put down as a means to prevent Christian woman from vying for a position of power. When looking at her Gospel it is evident that the teachings do not “lead” the reader to the Church. Instead, they encourage the reader to look within themselves and find the spirit that lives in their heart and soul. This revelation, most likely, greatly angered the Church due to the fact that it stripped their power away. If Christians were able to find God and follow his teachings without the help of the Church, then it would ultimately lose its power and control over the people. Even within her own Gospel Mary is of Magdala is treated less than due to her being a woman. This is evident when the Disciple Peter says: “Did he, then, speak with a woman in private without our knowing about it? Are we to turn around and listen to her? Did he choose her over us?” This shows the greed of the disciples, their greed for the approval of God and his son. Bases on their statements throughout the Gospel it is clear that they are not hungry for the Gospel in of itself but instead hungry for the divine after-life promised to them if they follow the teachings. They most likely believe that the closer they are to Jesus the closer they are to Heaven. The fact that Jesus and Mary were so close scared them and made them envious. It is a saddening fact that the majority of Mary’s Gospel was lost, however the question is, was it lost or purposefully hidden out of jealousy, fear, and sexism?

Within this blog I will write entries pertaining to my freshman seminar – Forbidden Texts

Within this blog I will write entries pertaining to my freshman seminar – Forbidden Texts

Welcome to Sites@UMW. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!

Welcome to Sites@UMW. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!