The Impact Of Religion Through Slavery On The Sexual Values Of Black WomenEssay Preview: The Impact Of Religion Through Slavery On The Sexual Values Of Black WomenReport this essayAbstractThe Impact of Religion through Slavery on the Sexual Values of Black WomenBlack women in America are underrepresented in studies on sexuality and religiosity. This paper will attempt to show the impact of religion on the sexuality of Black women. In addition, the portrayal of Black women in the media and society are negative images and stereotypes. The roles wife, mother and sexual object are defined by the idealized images of the women and effects current cultures of Black women harmfully. The purpose of this paper is to explore how the religion has shaped the development of Black women sexual identity and self-esteem.
There will be three eras explored in this paper regarding the effects religion has had on the American Black Woman. The era explored is the slavery era, in which religion and the sexual values of the American Black woman were not choices of her own but of other males both White and Black. This period of history also brought about the first introduction to organized religion and how it was perceived by the American Black slave woman. The second period in this paper is the era of reconstruction in American history. During reconstruction the newly freed American Black woman now had to learn how to interpret societal norms regarding family, religion and sex. After the reconstruction era came the current era explore, this era is of the modern 20th and 21st century in America encompassing the civil rights movement and integration on to the current assimilation, modernization and globalization. These areas of stratification have effected religion as an institution and continued to affect the values of sex on the American Black woman in a repressive manner continuing on with negative images and stigmas that manifest in the subconscious of the American Black woman.
Review of LiteratureThe Impact of Religion through Slavery on the Sexual Values of Black WomenThe impact of religion on the sexual values of Black women in America will be evaluated using the structural functionalism theory. The social institution of religion is interrelated to the functions of the individual in their cultural and social patterns. The norms learned from the religious institutions effects the self image of the Black woman and eventually her sexual values are affected as a result of the stigmas associated. This paper will explore the representation of Black womens sexuality with respect to their values and patterns learned from religious institutions, media and negative social and cultural stigmas. Religion places the value on sex and sexuality of the female as something to be protected and sinful if done outside of marriage. Black women have had to deal with the norms of these religious values on sex added with stigmas from slavery about the vitality of the sexual Black woman. Add to this the media depiction of Black women in modern society and this has created a negative body image, distorted self-esteem and repressed sexual values.
Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome is said to be in the DNA genetic code of the American Black, and that we have in our internal system coding that makes American Blacks scared, dormant and passive. The repeated abuse and sexual assault on the American Slave woman has been engrained in the genetics of their offspring. The systematic breakdown of the American Slave mentality into submission coupled with the converting the slave to forced Christianity allowed the White master to have total control over the American Slave. The master was the closest thing to GOD; the prayers of the slave were only answered at the discretion of their masters. From the early visits to Africa the European man saw the African woman as a sexual being and without humanity because they were not Christians.
According to Pilgrim (2002):European travelers to Africa found scantily clad natives. This semi nudity was misinterpreted as lewdness. White Europeans, locked into the racial ethnocentrism of the 17th century, saw African polygamy and tribal dances as proof of the Africans uncontrolled sexual lust. Europeans were fascinated by African sexuality. William Bosman described the Black women on the coast of Guinea as “fiery” and “warm” and “so much hotter than the men.” (Pilgrim, 2002)
Before the slave trade began the European white males had already formed their disposition of the nature of the African woman. Without understanding the social and cultural norms of the African society and that the half dressed woman was natural. Thinking that the pluralistic marriages were a part of a sexual deviance instead of their religious and cultural practices the European male furthered his biased belief of the sexual patterns of the African Woman.
Once the slave trade began the stereotypes had already been formed as to the religious and sexual nature of the African slave. In America the stereotypes worsened with disrespectful and inhumane treatment received from the White masters beginning at the auction block. “Slaves, whether on the auction block or offered privately for sale, were often stripped naked and physically examinedNakedness, especially among women in the 18th and 19th centuries, implied lack of civility, morality, and sexual restraint even when the nakedness was forced.” (Pilgrim, 2002) These were the beginning stages of the sexual repression that would plague the culture of the American Black woman for the next few centuries until present day. These issues of improper sexual morality were further integrated with the Christian conversion that took place during these times. The slave masters had to reconcile their behavior with their religion, and since the bible didnt expressly encourage the holding of slaves it brought about a great issue among slave holders as to how they dealt with their religious convictions.
The accounts of the slaves being converted to Christianity are documented in the Methodist Episcopal Church file under the General Rules of 1739 amended by the founder John Wesley. (Johnstone, 1983) This was in an effort to assist the slave owner with being absolved of sins for holding another human in bondage. This allowed slave owners to convert slaves and offer manumission. The offer of being converting was made but to a slave is this actual choice that can be made of their free will? Although it appeared that John Wesley himself was against slavery and the owning or holding of slaves, it eventually became an issue in the Methodist community in America. The slave trade was a lucrative economic industry in the country at the time. So the capitalist nature of the growing country was unable to restrict the owning of slaves
The Slave Law
The first amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that the citizen’s slavery is against the will of the United States. In 1847 the state legislature passed a 1774 constitution that was drafted to prohibit slavery. The document states that “the people of these counties shall not keep or hold slaves in the United States, but shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;” so that only the states can restrict slavery on the basis of religion. However, states that allowed slavery often required a person to “do some evil,” so that they could be jailed for doing it. In 1776 the state Legislature passed an 1801 state constitutional law prohibiting the holding of slaves. It was not a clear end date, so all the states that held the slaves were required by law to give slaves in their custody the right-to-life and other protections necessary to defend their owners.
Though slavery, by its very nature, was only limited to the U.S., other states also allowed slaves to be held as servants of the church or as slaves. The “slave race” was a different situation. American slavery allowed for people to be held as laborers under federal law but they were allowed to choose to hold slaves: slaves were expected to work on their own wages.
With this in mind, states can vary in their laws in regard to the fate and status of slaves depending on whether the person is willing to go to the slave plantation and live with the people. However, a slave in a slave colony would not have the right to live with the people unless he has committed crimes against the people. However, many states would permit slaves to be held as guests and as servants of the church or as slaves. If a child was living in someone else’s property and they could not be moved and could not come home their own, the person having their rights was held as a servant. This meant that the “slave race” faced an enormous financial and moral hazard in keeping one’s slaves. While African Americans faced similar hardships being released into slavery, other groups were more prone to it.
What Do They Do?
The purpose of slavery was to maintain the status quo, so that the only people able to benefit were the slaves and not the government. With enslaved people in prisons and prison houses, in slavery they were often subject to the same sorts of cruelty and servitude. Slavery was a violation of the freedom to vote, hold elected officials to the standards of the age, be free of oppression, and live in dignity. Slave owners were usually able to prevent people from becoming slaves for moral reasons. For example, in 1856, two freed black men were incarcerated and sent to slavery in Louisiana. Later that year one freed white man was sent to a slave plantation in South Carolina. And yet some black slaves were kept as slaves while some white Americans were forced to live as slaves.
The abolition of slavery did not just create a new and vastly different form of society at the nation’s dawn. It did the opposite. As a result, people took on the roles of the slaves and kept their people imprisoned, exiled, and forced to live on the streets, in cages for months on end. The slave trade, by contrast, did not lead to a mass exodus of white people from places such as Africa’s South, but rather did not stop people from being able to remain living, productive members of society. This was not because slave owners did not protect their fellow-citizens, but rather because they were not being held responsible for being enslaved.
To me the original vision of the Civil Rights Movement was the culmination of several years of research and a profound change in our understanding of how we see the world. Despite the challenges which it faced, I was determined to become interested in the issues surrounding its movement’s development, a quest that involved the search for solutions, not to destroy it, but rather to re-engage my desire to understand how the individual, not the government, was responsible for social order.
Over the years that followed, I had a new appreciation for the role of the government in society and began to study the history of modern governance – how it evolved from “property” as a concept that was derived from past events to the idea that institutions that we would view as the most important forms of governance in the world were actually based on property owned by the individual citizen. Over the years, my studies of the American Revolution led me to develop a more consistent understanding of the structure, history, and purposes of government, to help us better understand and comprehend the complex dynamics that shape the world. This process led to the emergence of the first National Organization of Black People (NOLBC), an organization that would help develop the ideas of freedom and democracy within the political system of the United States:
Our Constitution, the law, regulations, and policy of the United States, are composed of the will of the people determined by the people, their representatives, and by the powers and duties being vested in them by law. Our Declaration of Independence, by which we maintain the right to keep and bear arms, and to petition the federal government for all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, is an integral part of this Constitution. It is inalienable to our Government the right to keep and bear arms, and to petition the federal government for all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, from and against foreign invasion, for redress of grievances, and for the maintenance and proper administration of all Government programs within the United States. Our Constitution has been passed not by majorities in either house of Congress, but by a majority which is free and impartial; and the Constitution of this country expressly guarantees to each people the right to keep and bear arms under the law of the land as given to each other by an independent legislature. And it is our power to alter the laws of the State to the best of our ability or wisdom. No authority in the world
The abolition of slavery did not just create a new and vastly different form of society at the nation’s dawn. It did the opposite. As a result, people took on the roles of the slaves and kept their people imprisoned, exiled, and forced to live on the streets, in cages for months on end. The slave trade, by contrast, did not lead to a mass exodus of white people from places such as Africa’s South, but rather did not stop people from being able to remain living, productive members of society. This was not because slave owners did not protect their fellow-citizens, but rather because they were not being held responsible for being enslaved.
To me the original vision of the Civil Rights Movement was the culmination of several years of research and a profound change in our understanding of how we see the world. Despite the challenges which it faced, I was determined to become interested in the issues surrounding its movement’s development, a quest that involved the search for solutions, not to destroy it, but rather to re-engage my desire to understand how the individual, not the government, was responsible for social order.
Over the years that followed, I had a new appreciation for the role of the government in society and began to study the history of modern governance – how it evolved from “property” as a concept that was derived from past events to the idea that institutions that we would view as the most important forms of governance in the world were actually based on property owned by the individual citizen. Over the years, my studies of the American Revolution led me to develop a more consistent understanding of the structure, history, and purposes of government, to help us better understand and comprehend the complex dynamics that shape the world. This process led to the emergence of the first National Organization of Black People (NOLBC), an organization that would help develop the ideas of freedom and democracy within the political system of the United States:
Our Constitution, the law, regulations, and policy of the United States, are composed of the will of the people determined by the people, their representatives, and by the powers and duties being vested in them by law. Our Declaration of Independence, by which we maintain the right to keep and bear arms, and to petition the federal government for all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, is an integral part of this Constitution. It is inalienable to our Government the right to keep and bear arms, and to petition the federal government for all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, from and against foreign invasion, for redress of grievances, and for the maintenance and proper administration of all Government programs within the United States. Our Constitution has been passed not by majorities in either house of Congress, but by a majority which is free and impartial; and the Constitution of this country expressly guarantees to each people the right to keep and bear arms under the law of the land as given to each other by an independent legislature. And it is our power to alter the laws of the State to the best of our ability or wisdom. No authority in the world
In the years after slavery, slave ownership continued to rise so that in the 1960s Congress passed the Congressional Slave Bill, an expanded term intended to include slavery abolished but not eliminated, with more states being added to the list. A few years later the Congressional version of the bill became known as the “Threatened Citizen