Sometimes traditions are a bit iffy. But as they are
traditions, they end up accepted anyway. Is that a good thing? I like
traditions; I love the idea of something already being done in the fifties, the
19th century, long long ago. But longevity is not a purpose in
itself.
Recently, I came across two separate cases of people
challenging traditions. One was the Council of Europe wondering whether male circumcision should be banned. Or rather; should be discouraged, as the council
has no banning power. And of course many Jews were upset about this. Circumcision
is an important ritual in the Jewish faith, and banning such a practice can
feel like oppression of one’s religion
It is true, of course, that male circumcision is a modest
procedure. You can live a long, happy and healthy life after circumcision. But
is that the point? After thorough deliberation I decided I was against
circumcision. Of children of any faith or gender. If you’re an adult you can
decide yourself whether you want bits cut off, but babies can’t consent, and
circumcision does boil down to sticking a knife in someone who is perfectly
healthy.
Source: Cheskel Dovid
If you say it’s a tradition, and should therefore be
allowed, you open the door for all sorts of things. Forced marriage is also a
tradition. Female genital mutilation is too. Should we allow that? Most would
say no. Most would want these practices banned. So why not ban male
circumcision? I trust Jews have a bond with their God that, when push comes to shove, does not depend on
the presence or absence of some skin. And what about female Jews? These don’t
need bits cut off to be pious. If they can, why can't the men? I know this elaboration is an open invitation to be labelled
anti-Semitic, but I’ll live with that.
And then racism. Internet is teeming with articles (like this one, or this, or this) on
whether or not Zwarte Piet is a racist concept. He sure is part of a tradition!
And if you’re Dutch, it’s hard to look past that. But six years abroad might have
helped to have a slightly more distant look on things. Yes, it is a case of
modern “blackfacing”. And all the songs are rather specific; he’s a servant.
Does the look of a Zwarte Piet still stir up some fond feelings in me? Yes,
sure! If you’re not Dutch is hard to imagine how big this celebration is for
children. You get presents and sweets! There is this avuncular man that knows
everything, and a whole lot of young, athletic sidekicks that can jump and
juggle and walk on their hands and everything else. It’s magic! But step back
and it IS a blackface.
Source: EnSintClopedie
So now what? Ban Sinterklaas? No, I can’t support that. Sinterklaas
is about the patron saint of children. And yes saints are Catholic and the
Catholic church happens to be the biggest paedophile ring in the world, but
allow me to consider that beside the point for now. So should we have rainbow Piets? Yes, I think we should. And just changing the colour of the face paint won’t
do; the lipstick and the black curly wigs are still very blackface. But if you
end up with a sort of painted acrobat in 17th century costumes, I think you can preserve the magic of
Sinterklaas while not being so blatantly politically incorrect. I could imagine
later generations looking back at the present and wondering how this tradition
could have lasted that long. My parents were already adults when Martin Luther
King was murdered for wanting equality for people of any colour; that’s hard to
imagine as well now! So this is an invitation to call me an over-sensitive PC fetishist. In favour of black people,
against Jews? No. In favour of anyone who has the decency to not let other
suffer for their own traditions…
PS for the Dutch: I think Piet himself says it well here...
No comments:
Post a Comment