Ha. We do not go together, at all.
Okay, you the reader is wondering then why the hell I'm thinking about it and I will share with you why I feel the need to write what is basically a ridiculous declaration of my inability to cope with cannibalism and all allusions to same.
So, there I was reading the comments in a diary about a subject that I actually do not remember when I came a across a comment calling out the creepy (for some of us) Christian ritual of symbolically drinking the blood of Christ and eating his flesh in the form of crackers and bread.
I offhandedly responded with my take which is that that ritual is to me "fucking creepy". That's because for whatever reason I am innately and intrinsically very uncomfortable with any allusions to cannibalism, not matter "how well intended".
Truthfully, I can't imagine a "well intended" allusion to cannibalism in a setting where people are "all in" on celebrating said allusion, but hey I'm not the arbiter of other people's beliefs. All I know are my own.
I go to bed and wake up to some responses to my comment that basically challenge my comment. Most who know me know that a challenge to my comments don't worry me much, and "god" knows that over my decade in this site I've had tons of people try to shame me for having an opinion about one thing or another because of my username arguing that if I was "really inclusive" I would have no opinion. I have generally explained that being inclusive doesn't mean that you hang out with axe murderers and cheer them on.
Anyway, I reviewed my responses to my lifelong gut reaction to the blood/bread Christ body ritual that I have had. My response wasn't insightful or important. It was trite and personal. It was just my</> take. Who cares? I never thought that I would even rate a response, but I received three responses. Okay, it is a blog and someone else has another opinion and what you do is read it. That's what this is about and that's fine. Reasonable and good.
Thing is that I receive a response asserting that if I was going to live up to my username, "inclusive heart", I would not ever express my innate and inherent aversion to allusions to cannibalism. Further, the commenter went on to say that I was being "offensive" because I could not adopt their benign view of the Christian ritual and its meaning.
And so this is where everything, in my opinion, is getting totally derailed…
Before I get to my list of why I think that the commenter's position is wholly wrong, I want to just say that for whatever reason (not due to any personal experience) stories of cannibalism really freak me out. I don't "love" vampire stories and I am very uncomfortable with stories that include any cannibalistic allusions. I watched a PBS documentary about the people at the Donner Pass and didn't sleep for two weeks. I don't know why, that's just what happened to me.
Okay moving on to why I am bothering to write this because I am a big girl and can handle challenges that come to my ideas and philosophy and my stupid username…
1. If you think that my being "inclusive" should be defined by my ability to adopt your religious views including being happy with allusions to cannibalism, I'm out. I will change my username to something along the lines of "notincludingcannibalism" if you like, otherwise deal with it.
2. When I say that I find some part of the Christian (or any other religion's) symbolic ritual and iconography is "creepy" to me that is not a personal affront on my part. That is my personal response.
3. The assertion was made that if I were truly tolerant, I would not only not bad reactions to the religious symbolism and iconography, but I would also seek to understand the "multiple levels" of their importance and also adopt those views. Ummm definitely not. Anyone reading can believe what they want and you know what, I am part of that crowd.
On balance, I think that my intense aversion to cannibalism is a good thing. I don't plan on curtailing or moderating that aversion in an effort to satisfy people who would like to accuse me of intolerance if I do not. I think these defensive and desperate attacks against me and people like me are extremely strange. I don't get it and I don't really care.
All I really want anyone to know is that I won't be convinced that cannibalism is a reasonable activity because "The Bible".
Yeah, okay you're pissed because you are "reasonable", but that's not what those of us who don't "join" tend to get - that "reasonable" thing is mostly promoted by people telling me that being "inclusive" really means that I have to adopt someone else's view of the world based on religious views. It won't happen for me.
I am not your "inclusive" gal who will force others to adopt your views in order to make your dreams and fantasies to come true. Find yourselves some other prey and careful that you don't come across me because I will defend them from your conversion tactics if that is what they want. That is where inclusion makes a difference. Inclusion is not about forcing other people to live under your rules.