(no subject)

[mari4212]

I woke up this morning feeling absolutely cruddy, but I managed to improve throughout the day. I skipped my morning classes, attended my afternoon classes but felt like I was going to diz out, and was fine by the time I'd finished dinner. I'm guessing it was a 24 hour bug.

In Religion today, we were discussing images of prostitutes in the Old Testament. Basically, Rahab and Tamar. I found it interesting that one girl was willing to bend over backwards to figure out a way to make Judah not at fault in Tamar's story, and then said that she couldn't accept Tamar's actions as someone taking desperate steps to relieve a potentially really bad situation. This girl just does not get it. And then I thought, somewhere, someone is thinking the same thing about one of my statements/ideas.

I finally got around to doing laundry today, which is something I've been meaning to do since Sunday. And I did a few simple repairs, sewing on a hook for one of my skirts, taking out a hem in a few pairs of pants that have evidently shrunk since Mom hemmed them. I swear, when she hemmed them, I couldn't walk in the pants, they were too long. Then I get here, and they become highwaters, and when I take out the hem I'm not tripping on them. And I don't think it's the washing/drying machines, as I know how to use them correctly. Just one of the mysteries of the universe.

Medieval society was great, and my friend looked like she was over the moon to hear about Mom and Dad's offer of floor space to crash on over October break. No paying the money for a hotel.

And I'm stealing this quiz from my flist, specifically jediravenclaw and ljmckay. For once, you beat me to a quiz LJ! And I won't mind your results if you don't mind mine.

You are a Social Liberal (68% permissive) and an... Economic Liberal (11% permissive) You are best described as a: Socialist Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid

Comments

[wisdomeagle]

In Religion today, we were discussing images of prostitutes in the Old Testament. Basically, Rahab and Tamar. I found it interesting that one girl was willing to bend over backwards to figure out a way to make Judah not at fault in Tamar's story, and then said that she couldn't accept Tamar's actions as someone taking desperate steps to relieve a potentially really bad situation. This girl just does not get it. And then I thought, somewhere, someone is thinking the same thing about one of my statements/ideas.

Wow, that is the crazy because the story itself blames Judah for the situation. The story itself. Which is pretty much embedded in a patriarchal context. *shakes head*

People are the crazy.

[mari4212.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I do not understand her. This is the same girl who made the rather stupid comments about rape in our last class.

The statement of my own that I was thinking of when I was talking about someone else thinking I was nuts for saying was my Dr. Weir essay, which gained me my first really negative comments.

People are crazy, but normally it's a good kind of crazy. This is not the good kind.

Who are the two people in your icon? I know I should recognize their story. David and Jonathon maybe?

[wisdomeagle]

Ah. Must go see what negative comments yr Weir essay got...

And yep, a winner is you, for the boys in my icon are David and Jonathon. TheirloveissoCanon. Like whoa.

[mari4212.livejournal.com]

Yeah, they got mentioned as a classic biblical example of homosociablity in the Old Testament when my church was doing an adult education class about homosexuality in the Bible. Our eventual conclusion was that our ideas of homosexuality don't have much relationship to the concepts being banned in the Old Testament.

[wisdomeagle]

Yep; I've probably read most of what there is to read on Homosexuality In The Bible, and love my anachronistic OTPs. I pretty much treat the Bible like I do other fannish texts and squee a bit over David/Jonathon and Ruth/Naomi (crossgen incestuous femslash OTP!) -- and I know that wasn't the intention of the authors? But I'm totally okay with that.

[mari4212.livejournal.com]

Well, Ruth/Naomi wouldn't exactly be incestuous, as they aren't related by blood. Then again, they are closer than the normal mother-in-law/daughter-in-law, so does that make it incest by proxy?

And of course, I can never read that story without giggling over the feet reference. Really, my mind gets dirtier in my Religion classes than in any other place.

And sometimes it's fun to go far away from the original authorial intent.