In a comment a few posts ago, Adam ‘the DJ’ Brett tracked down the following paper at the upcoming SBL meeting:
In the Feminist Hermeneutics of the Bible session on 11/20/2010 at 1:00 PM to 3:30 PM in Room: Dunwoody – Hyatt Regency
Kathryn D. Blanchard, of Alma College, has a paper entitled:
‘“If Your Vaginas Could Talk, What Would They Say?” An Interview with Hagar and Sarah’.
Adam asks:
Has SBL contacted Blanchard and ask her to change the title of her paper? If not it seems like SBL is making your case for you.
What argument is that? The rather simple point, made initially by Stefanie Schön, that
the overwhelmingly male coterie of biblical scholars is all too ready to espy in hapax legomenae references to women’s genitals. Is it because sexualising the textual bodies of women is a way of objectifying and thereby disempowering them, while the textual bodies of men must not be so treated? If so, then my reading is an explicit attempt to sexualise, objectify and thereby disempower textual male bodies.
28 October, 2010 at 8:32 am
You know what awesome English phrase did not yet make an appearance (unless I missed it)? Circle-jerk. Now I’d like to see you get away with a “Prophetic Circle-Jerk” paper!
P.S. I find the question about the talking vaginas to be somewhat ridiculous – is it edgy and cool because it’s about genitalia? I imagine “If squirrels could talk, would they need nuts?” or “If lions could fly, where would they go first?” sorts of questions are probably not going to be as scandalous, even if equally odd…
28 October, 2010 at 4:45 pm
Concerning ‘circle-jerk’, here’s Allen Edwardes with his recreation of the scene in Ex 32 of the Golden Calf/Bull:
A sacred autoerotic-homosexual ritual erupted when a vast number of males … ‘cocked up to pound repeatedly’ (yiqqumû li-tzahiq). Linked like huge chains of flesh about the idol, these zealots performed the circular dance (hagg) sanctified to arouse the procreative power of Apis with the seminal libations of repeated masturbation and round-robin sodomy (Edwardes 1967: 9-10).
Haven’t tried this sending this paper – on Edwardes – to anyone bar Sexualities, which forund it a little to much for even their tastes. Bugger!
28 October, 2010 at 1:08 pm
How convenient of the SBL to demonstrate the argument with such simplistic uncomplicated clarity. How revoultingly appallingly true they have proved it to be -I am completely utterly disgusted, shame on the SBL. (If vaginas talked, they might talk about sausages but it’s probably more likely that sausages would talk about vaginas – creeps)
28 October, 2010 at 4:48 pm
If we addded a paper, say, on circle jerks, and on the cleft of Yahweh’s arse, we’d have a session.
28 October, 2010 at 1:15 pm
Well we also know that sausages don’t like to talk about sausages, as Roland has discovered. Perhaps the first rule of sausage fest is that you never talk about sausage fest?
28 October, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Except with looks of disapproval and judgement.