The Christ in the Picture

I'm not one to engage in criticism of religious beliefs in the personal level (not anymore); I do breach the subject when it comes to religion intruding in my private life or in public policy, for example. I'm sincerely baffled about this, though, so that's why. It's about the story of my co-worker and her lovely granddaughter. My co-worker (let's call her Ms. A) is convinced that her 15-month-old granddaughter (I'll call her Little N) has come to know Jesus instinctively and in spite of her parents' lack of belief. As far as I can tell, her father (Ms. A's son) is not very religious, and her mother is agnostic.

Little N has developed a fixation with a picture of Jesus. During a visit, grandma saw the poor thing's eyes intently fixed on the image, and she told Little N who that man was, and taught her a children's prayer. Little N can barely say "Jesus" but she does stare happily at the picture, and she waves and smiles at it whenever she toddles past it. So far, so good, a little religious indoctrination. Only now Ms. A is convinced that her granddaughter really sees something in the picture, that she recognizes Jesus. My other co-workers, women in their 50s mostly, agree that Little N must be seeing something we spoiled adults cannot see. The girl's parents decided not to baptize her, so this must be Little N's way of "asking for baptism". It's "really incredible, but then children know". One of these women, speaking from a fairly typical, incoherently sincretic view, opines that the baby "doesn't see that picture (of Jesus) as we do, but she sees the energy". They also believe that Little N "might bridge the separation between their parents and God".

They kept on this line of discussion, turning then into the individual stories of their children's loss of religious practice. Most people in Argentina are Catholics that have never practiced; many of us attend church only as long as our parents take us, or when forced for some other reason, until we become teenagers or a bit longer. Then, it's only weddings, First Communions, baptisms, and even more rarely, on Easter Sunday and the like. Will this be the future of Little N? Will she turn into a skeptic at an early age? Will she become a prophet of the Christ in the Picture?

I didn't open my mouth during the discussion and definitely closed my ears to the last part I've just revisited, since time and experience have taught me that nothing good comes from discussing religion. I've been an atheist and a skeptic since 21; I lost years of my life coping with the progressive loss of the hollow faith I was raised in, and revisiting my arguments for people who've never bothered to examine their own beliefs would be a waste of time. I only wish Little N is given the space and the education that she will need to think about it and to reach her own conclussions in time.

Scandalous! Outrageous!

Believe it or not, only now have the media and the good part of society discovered that, yes, there are minors watching (and participating) in erotic shows. First it was in Neuquén, and now in Rosario. The horror!

Come on! Erotic shows including softcore pseudo-lesbianism and partial stripping (the latter featuring both men and women) have been en vogue for years, and many perfectly respectable adult citizens have witnessed and enjoyed them, with very well-disguised guilt or embarrassment or without anything of the sort, in discos and resto-bars. And I don't mean only friendly gangs of horny 20-somethings, but also perfectly plain girls and middle-aged couples as well. Did they think the children would miss them? Did they think regulations would stop entertainment establishments from staging some light porn?

Is it a good idea? Probably not. Is it degrading? Being a feminist myself, I'd say yes, but it's not my call anyway. Is it harmful to the sexual development of minors to watch this overtly fake eroticism? Maybe. Is it ridiculous to make a big fuss out of this while ignoring the fact that these minors were also killing their own brain cells with alcohol, and their own lungs with tobacco smoke (first- or second-hand) in the very same establishment, where it is illegal but widely tolerated? Definitely.

In 1961, science-fiction author Theodore Sturgeon wrote a short story called If All Men Were Brothers, Would You Let One Marry Your Sister?. It was about an isolated planetary human culture which allowed consensual incest between adults. The story appeared in a collection called Dangerous Visions, compiled by Harlan Ellison, and Sturgeon added an afterword where he marvelled at the human capacity for closed-mindedness, saying most people simply consider that certain stuff is bad, and once established that as if it were fact, further avenues of thought and inquiry are shut off. He gave porn as an example, noting that very few people go past the criticism of porn as smut/garbage. These few might admit they don't like porn out in the open because kids can eventually "get their hands on it". Of these, only a few, if pressured, might admit that that is in turn bad because it gets the kids horny. Only but a handful will admit that they don't like the idea of kids being sexually aroused, and basically none will stand being pressured to come up with a reason why sexual arousal is bad for the kids (where it comes from is another matter). These attitudes have changed a bit since 1961, but the holier-than-thou attitude mostly persists.

Yes, fake eroticism fed to an alcohol-stupefied young mind is probably not a good idea. But let's cut the moral outrage.