Mark,
I appreciate your response to my post, and your questions for what and why
I said what I did. I'm also glad you didn't personally experience what I
and many of my schoolmates did during those years, perhaps I should say
"under that system".
The stereotypical brutal nun is not what I was referring to, nor did I
mean to imply that I alone suffered from physical and mental and emotional
abuse from nuns alone. I had the joy of being in several types of systems,
some with nuns, some with brothers, some with priests, and in every case I
either received personally or watched others receive what today would be
considered abusive treatment.
I think the issue here is not one of whether a kindly nun recalls her
misdeeds as readily as she seems to recall the joy of taping a student's
mouth, but rather the basic premise for such actions in the first place.
Do your really think it is a virtuous thing for a nun, or anyone, to place
masking tape on a student?
I've seen a wide range of "religious" orders whose members were teaching
others. Some were more sinister than others; most had psychological
problems of their own which led them to leave the order later in life.
Some were in fact wonderful people bound up in a system which required
reinforcement of the prevailing attitude regarding individuals (good or
bad person) or groups (males all think this way - evil, while girls are
always looking like they have too much makeup, etc, etc). The sum total of
all the occurrences were to inflict long-term humiliation on the person
standing in front of the authority figure, whether nun, priest or brother.
I was witness to some sights I hope never to see again in my lifetime. So
it isn't necessary to have it all happen to me, thank god, but it all did
happen just the same.
So the point of my response was to ask that individuals and groups and
organizations in positions of authority remember that what they do will
stay on long after the authority figure is dead and buried. As simple as
that.
I don't want anyone taping my mouth or yours or your kid's. If a system
behaves that way, in an insidious manner, it needs changing, that's all.
It's not the accuracy of the nun's story, or whether she prayed every
night, but rather the "thinking" that allows for, and supports, abuse in
any form.
Does that help clarify my intent? If not, check back with me via private
email and we can chat some more. Thanks for bringing it up.
Mark L. Peal wrote:
> John Constantine wrote: <snip> Anyone who has attended parochial school
> in the fifties and sixties knows from experience that life was not so
> cutesy back then. I remember . . . <end snip>
>
> John, it sounds like you're saying that anyone who attended parochial
> school at that time had the same experience you had. Most assuredly, many
> people did (enough to make "Nunsense" a hit play). And many suffered
> abuse. And that was wrong.
> But just as assuredly, many (myself included) did not. The stereotype
> of the brutal nun just doesn't fit, and it's as unjust as the tape
> incident in the story.
> The story of Sister Helen that Tad passed along to us is a bit maudlin
> for my taste. But there's a valuable lesson in it, the power of
> reinforcing the self-esteem of other individuals. In the jargon of our
> day, it's a win-win. Attack it with categorical characterizations.
> Patronize the author because she might be elderly. It still doesn't
> invalidate the message.
> Just my little gesture in defense of good nuns and a good story.
>
> Mark Peal
> mpeal@mms.org
--Sincerely,
John Constantine Rainbird Management Consulting PO Box 23554 Santa Fe, NM 87502-3554 Rainbird@Trail.Com http:\\www.trail.com\~rainbird
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>