- Status
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
That video was truly one of the most cringe-y things I’ve ever seen.
It was hilarious.
It was hilarious.
E
Exiled_Child
Guest
Agreed 100%.
M
McCall1981
Guest
That looked like one of those ads for Scientology 
P
phil19034
Guest
More like a 1982 MTV video
The Vatican would have been better off hiring the Augustan Institute to do it (the developers of Symbolon, YDisciple, Lectio, and Beloved, which are all very well done like Fr Baron’s Catholicism).
S
saintjohnxxiii
Guest
What the H-E double hockey sticks were they thinking? I suppose the only good is that NC Reporter was upset!
P
ProVobis
Guest
No joke.
W
weller2
Guest
The funniest part is that the contributions would be shown at a meeting of bishops and cardinals in Rome (pressumably concerned with women).
The approach used here is strangely similar to the recent women’s rights conference in Saudi Arabia:
http://www.konbini.com/en/files/2015/02/ob_8757bf_o-saudi-arabia-womens-conference-570-810x420.jpg
The approach used here is strangely similar to the recent women’s rights conference in Saudi Arabia:
http://www.konbini.com/en/files/2015/02/ob_8757bf_o-saudi-arabia-womens-conference-570-810x420.jpg
M
Mystical_Seeker
Guest
What is the big deal about her being “sexy”?
And what was wrong with her message? Did she utter a single word that was demeaning to women or against Church teachings? I didn’t hear any.
You’d think she was doing a pole dance by the reaction; it may be a bit quirky but I don’t see anything about the video that might cause “lust” except the fact that they used the particular model they did instead of Rosie O’Donnell, I guess. Or how about Sister Angelica – would they say she is “too pretty” to talk about women’s issues?
Or do we object to her accent? She looks “pretty” and has an “accent” so therefore she is trying to seduce us instead of informing us of the Vatican’s invitation?
Or maybe she should have been wearing a burka? Maybe there’s a good reason they are required in some countries, if this is how we react in the “Christian” world.
And what was wrong with her message? Did she utter a single word that was demeaning to women or against Church teachings? I didn’t hear any.
You’d think she was doing a pole dance by the reaction; it may be a bit quirky but I don’t see anything about the video that might cause “lust” except the fact that they used the particular model they did instead of Rosie O’Donnell, I guess. Or how about Sister Angelica – would they say she is “too pretty” to talk about women’s issues?
Or do we object to her accent? She looks “pretty” and has an “accent” so therefore she is trying to seduce us instead of informing us of the Vatican’s invitation?
Or maybe she should have been wearing a burka? Maybe there’s a good reason they are required in some countries, if this is how we react in the “Christian” world.
M
mdgspencer
Guest
It really isn’t sexy. I presume that this word is used by someone with an agenda.
I couldn’t hear what she was saying on the video as provided by this article, though, so I can’t say if this video seems counterproductive or not.
She is feminine, though, which isn’t an offense to me.
I couldn’t hear what she was saying on the video as provided by this article, though, so I can’t say if this video seems counterproductive or not.
She is feminine, though, which isn’t an offense to me.
M
Mystical_Seeker
Guest
EXACTLY!
(“bold” emphasis mine)
I could hear her, but her accent was thick enough it was a challenge for me. She said nothing “alluring” in any way; it was completely legit as far as I could tell.
I have been looking for a transcript and haven’t found one so far; maybe I’ll have to make one. Meanwhile, I found some “interesting” opinions about it.
The following was from an NPR story, I think. I intended to put in the link but for some silly reason I’m having trouble finding it now in my history.
Just before Christmas, his office launched the (hash)lifeofwomen crowd-sourcing initiative to promote the Feb. 4-7 plenary meeting and invite women around the globe to send in a 60-second video of their lives for possible inclusion in a montage to be screened at the “big meeting of cardinals and bishops” next week.
In the video, Italian actress Nancy Brilli earnestly asks her viewers how often they ask themselves “Who are you? What do you do? What do you think about yourself as a woman?”
The criticism was swift and harsh.
Sexy sell: 'What were they thinking?'
“What were they thinking at the Vatican?” wrote Phyllis Zagano of Hofstra University in the liberal National Catholic Reporter. “Aside from the obvious — sexy sell has long gone by the boards in developed nations and is totally unacceptable in predominantly Muslim countries —- the fact of the matter is that highlighting a stereotypical spokeswoman is not the way to ask for women’s (name removed by moderator)ut.”
Critics noted that the women the Vatican might most want to hear from - those suffering from poverty, violence or war - might not have a smart phone at hand to send in a clip. Others noted that the two-week deadline - at the height of the Christmas holidays - worked against any widespread response.
The English version of Brilli’s promo was summarily yanked, though the Italian remains on the ministry’s website.
In the end, some 250 videos were sent in. A good number came from activists advocating for women’s ordination.
Consuela Corradi, a sociologist at Rome’s Catholic Lumsa university, was one of 15 women who advised Ravasi on the initiative. She complained that criticism of the video was unfair.
Defending choice of actress in video
“If we had chosen an ugly woman, would that have changed the message? I don’t think so,” she said. She said the women consultants were entirely responsible for penning the working document, with no interference from the ministry, though she said their document was trimmed for length.
It remains unclear, however, what will come of it. Often such working drafts become the basis for a final document that is adopted by the full membership of a Vatican office at the end of a plenary meeting. Ravasi, though, hasn’t said what he’ll do with it.
Helen Alvare, a law professor at George Mason University and a consultant at the Vatican’s laity office, said the language in the draft paper was remarkable given that it calls for “collaboration and integration” with men within the church. She said that mirrors findings from leading business consultancies that companies do better when men and women collaborate at every level.
“That statement is the strongest endorsement I have seen in a church document for what we sometimes call complementarity within the church,” she said in a phone interview.
P
pnewton
Guest
I do not understand why anyone would take exception to the video. The link did not work for me, so I had to go elsewhere. Was she not Canadian enough for the reporter? There was no sexual content, even in the least, anywhere in the video.
W
weller2
Guest
A much more interesting question is: if the estimeed committee of bishops is really interested in (name removed by moderator)ut from women, why not simply organize an open Q&A session, so any woman can come in and speak her mind? Is the committee afraid of some potentially difficult questions?
Instead women are asked to send in video clips, which will be edited into a video which fits the party line, that will be shown to the committee, who – based on this – will decide that there are no real issues to be addressed, congratulate themselves on the job well done, and retire for dinner.
Instead women are asked to send in video clips, which will be edited into a video which fits the party line, that will be shown to the committee, who – based on this – will decide that there are no real issues to be addressed, congratulate themselves on the job well done, and retire for dinner.
M
Mystical_Seeker
Guest
I’d say because then we would hear only from women who live in Rome, or who have the desire and means to travel there. I think this way is much more “accessible.”
As it turns out, women from the US were excluded because of the uproar over the video, so I guess it worked out the same for them.
MS
S
sttcatherinefan
Guest
The more disturbing thing is that there are no women on the Pontifical Council of Culture. So the all male council will be making recommendations about women in the Church.
And they don’t want to hold an open QA because they don’t want to dialogue with the women ordination activists, etc. To which I say, why not dialogue with the feminists or womenpriests? The Catholic Church dialogues with everyone else. Not hearing from voices that are critical of it is what gets the Church into trouble.
M
Mystical_Seeker
Guest
So given the situation that it is an all-male council making the decisions, is it not better that at least women have some chance to “have a say” before them?
I think there are theological reasons why women ordination is a dead issue any time soon. I don’t understand them exactly, but I know that Francis has limits. Like for example he can change traditions, but when it comes to certain elements like that, I think it’s pretty dug in.
As far as dialog with feminists, they can make videos and submit them just like anyone else. I can think of some pretty good reasons not to have any desire to dialog with certain feminist leaders today (that Christina Hoff Sommers describes as “gender feminists” compared to “equality feminists” in this book). I got quite a dose of them when I took Developmental Psych last semester. I even self-identified as “androgynous” on one quiz because I had to give an example and hadn’t read the chapter. The part that bothers me most, is that feminist leaders are against giving women information such as under what conditions they are putting themselves at high risk of attack, because then if they do get attacked we will “blame the victim” for putting herself there. One feminist wrote that it is an “act of terrorism” to let young women grow up thinking they live in a world where they are not safe from men. Because men are the problem. I say, doesn’t it “empower” the victim for more information? When did it become “bad” for women to have information about under what conditions other women will be attacked? But that is wrong to them because even by identifying them statistically, we are inherently blaming the victims for having been put in this situation, and this is a typical male response. Men would rather inform women and make it their fault, rather than change themselves so especially when “all male” teams are working on, for example, products a woman can use to detect “date-rape” drugs in their drinks, they are scorned viciously. I’m not making this up – if you don’t believe me I could probably quote a few sources but I’d rather not.
As far as dialog, we just had news that Pope Francis had a private discussion with at transgendered man, and the man was very pleased with the whole thing, and it has improved his life especially since his own bishop had referred to him as the “devil’s daughter.” The Vatican will not confirm it, though, because it was a private discussion and they do not publish who has a private discussion with him. I wish they would confirm it but I see their point; can you imagine having a list in church of the names of everyone who went to Father for personal counseling each week?
W
weller2
Guest
- TV stations regularly hold Q&A sessions where viewers can dial in. International phone calls are not that expensive, and besides, there is Skype. I should also note that Tsar Vladimir Putin regularly holds live televised Q&A sessions, so there are no technological obstacles.
- With Facebook etc. you can always find a friend of a friend who happens to be in Rome.
It is of course progress compared to having no female (name removed by moderator)ut at all, but my objection is that this way of doing things puts too much power into the hands of the person editing the contributions. And if the editor’s job depends on keeping the committee happy, then you have a recipe for creating an echo chamber.
I think that a truly open floor would produce some very interesting questions going beyond what you get from career feminists. I, for one, would ask the committee why the Catholic Church opposes anti-Islamization legislation (cf. response to the Swiss minaret ban).
M
Mystical_Seeker
Guest
Yes, but if I were offered a chance to have my opinion about something I’m passionate about regarding the church, in a video that IS shown before the assembly, and that was made into a compilation for all to see after that as “(name removed by moderator)ut from various faithful” I’d jump on that chance in a minute.
And yes I’m so happy for all this technology now, and just as a completely wild guess, I have a feeling Pope Francis probably has met with feminists – just not ones that are apparently “loud” or “famous” enough that we would have heard about it. Given what we see and hear from and about Pope Francis, I would not put it past him to have met with anybody – even “satanists” or other “haters” of the Church – and like you say the technology is there. Has he? I don’t know. But he has just as much available from Google and YouTube as the rest of us, so I’m pretty sure he can find “mainstream feminists” whatever that means, opinions.
Yes, there surely will be many good points of view that can’t “make the cut” given however many they plan to use. The editor does have a lot of power here. That said, when our diocese had a Synod and asked for candid opinions (either in person at meetings or in writing anonymously) for the first time in diocese history, I got to work on it and even though I hadn’t personally been that impressed with the bishop, I did get the impression he really was looking for a good representation of the truth, rather than “hearing what he wants to hear.” So yeah, we agree it’s better than nothing.
When I read this, I thought about TED talks. Have you seen TED talks? I could just see a TED-talk like stage set, where women could present their cases before the cardinals personally. And like you said, they could do that with Skype. So nothing is stopping them.
My beef is that they chose this route, and because we had “controversy” over the actress and/or production of the spot, it was pulled from the US and I personally believe that was a disservice to the women in the US. Maybe a thousand US women would all ban together and tell them off for their spot and say how this unknowingly triggers negative reaction, and explain why. In 60 seconds. Do it honestly, and without even a hint of anger, but explain it well enough so that even the males in the marketing department can understand. Maybe they would play it, maybe they would.
I think a much better strategy when dealing with powerful institutions is to FIRST take fullest advantage of the “avenues” that they do offer, and THEN do what you can to open new avenues and suggest changes in format.
Actually about 10 years ago I used to send a lot of email to Pope Benedict, because I had a lot to say and I thought it was cool that he even had an email address. He probably never saw any of them, but “someone” in Rome at least had to glance over my email enough to decide whether it needs to be atttended to or trashed. So did I get a private audience with the pope? No. Did I “plant a seed or two” in the minds of some flunkee handling the mail – who happens to be within bicycling distance of the pope? Yes.
By the way, according to vatican.com:
Pope Francis does not have a direct mailing address but you can contact the Vatican’s press office at av@pccs.va . Alternately you can mail the pope via usual mail at this address:
His Holiness, Pope Francis PP.
00120 Via del Pellegrino
Citta del Vaticano
So there you go. Talk to the PR guys, right? haha oh well same thing – what’s the chance my one-in-a-zillion emails will ever see the Pope, but at least “somebody” in Rome will see, if nothing else, the “subject” heading on my email before (s)he deletes it.
MS
S
sttcatherinefan
Guest
The fact that there isn’t a single woman on the Pontifical Council for Culture is the issue. Are there no female academics or writers or commentators or actors to appoint to it? Do women have no insight into the interaction between the Catholic Church and popular culture? Isn’t appointing women to the Pontifical Council of Culture an easy win for the Vatican? We aren’t talking about the liturgy, priestly formation, doctrinal manners, or canon law manners. (Although I am not sure why women cannot be consulted on those matters.) We are talking about essentially the Vatican ministry of culture.
Dialogue with Jewish people hasn’t led the Catholic Church to renounce Jesus’ Divinity. There is no reason that they cannot talk with each other.
As for feminists, yes some of them go over the top and destroy their credibility. However, the Vatican doesn’t talk with people who disagree with it as all and seems to exist inside its own little echo chamber which is why things like this ridiculous conference happen. There was no one who was playing devil’s advocate.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Or you could text to his Latin twitter account. How many know Latin?Actually about 10 years ago I used to send a lot of email to Pope Benedict, because I had a lot to say and I thought it was cool that he even had an email address. He probably never saw any of them, but “someone” in Rome at least had to glance over my email enough to decide whether it needs to be atttended to or trashed. So did I get a private audience with the pope? No. Did I “plant a seed or two” in the minds of some flunkee handling the mail – who happens to be within bicycling distance of the pope? Yes.
By the way, according to vatican.com:
Pope Francis does not have a direct mailing address but you can contact the Vatican’s press office at av@pccs.va . Alternately you can mail the pope via usual mail at this address:
His Holiness, Pope Francis PP.
00120 Via del Pellegrino
Citta del Vaticano
So there you go. Talk to the PR guys, right? haha oh well same thing – what’s the chance my one-in-a-zillion emails will ever see the Pope, but at least “somebody” in Rome will see, if nothing else, the “subject” heading on my email before (s)he deletes it.
MS
- Status