Marxists also see religion as a product of alienation. Alienation involves becoming separated from or losing control of something you have produced. Marxists believe that the highest form of alienation exists in capitalist society. This is because the working class don’t own what they produce and also have no control over the method of production and therefore have no freedom to express their human nature. Also, the working class endlessly repeat the same minute task and therefore start to question why they are doing it. Religion then steps in as an opium of the people and dulls the pain of exploitation. However religion is a consolation and only acts as a mask for the pain rather than treating the underlying cause, this is because religion is a distorted view of the world and therefore can’t offer any solution to earthly misery and instead offers an afterlife illusion which diverts attention from dealing with capitalism. However this view is rejected by Althusser as he believes the concept of alienation is unscientific as human beings have a ‘true self’.
Marxists show how religion can be viewed as a tool of oppression that’s masks exploitation and creates false class consciousness. However, he ignores positives functions that religion provides such as the psychological adjustment to misfortune, which Neo-Marxists see as assistance rather than a burden.
However Marxist Feminist Simone de Beauvoir believes religion reinforces the needs of capitalism when therefore reiterates the role of a housewife for women. She believes that religion cushions the effects of capitalism by representing women in mother and carer roles. For example the Church provides mother and toddler groups to help socialise their children, however this emphasises gender roles within society that women should be the child bearer and take up any jobs involved with childcare, this idea is strengthened further by the Pope as in the year of Madonna he said all women should not work.
Radical feminists believe religion reinforces patriarchy through legitimating male authority, power and control. They believe that religious organisations tend to be male dominated despite the fact that women participate more in these organisations. For example, In Judaism and Catholicism women are forbidden from becoming priests, Armstrong believes that the exclusion of women from becoming priests and in most religions shows despite their amount of participation demonstrates the dominance and marginalisation. They also believe that places of worship tend to marginalise women and give men the head and dominant roles. For example, the segregation of men and women in places of worship marginalises women as their involvement then becomes restricted, for instance, women sit behind screens while men occupy more central and sacred spaces and also women are not allowed to preach or read from sacred texts. In addition taboos that regard menstruation, pregnancy and childbirth as polluting forbid women from any form of participation in religious rituals. For example, in Islam, menstruating women are not allowed to touch the Qur’an nor take part in other rituals such as fasting. Jean Holm regards this as the devaluation of women in religion. They believe this is furthered by sacred texts as this mainly consists of the doing of male gods and reflect anti-female stereotypes. For example, Eve in the story of Genesis caused humanity’s fall from grace and was expelled from the Garden of Eden. Finally they also believe Religious laws and customs give women fewer rights than men. For example, access to divorce, how many spouses they may marry, dress codes etc. Religious influences on cultural norms may also lead to unequal treatment, such as genital mutilation or punishments from sexual immorality. Also many religions legitimate and regulate women’s traditional domestic and reproductive role. For instance, the Catholic Church forbids abortion and contraception.
However Woodhead criticises feminist explanations that simply equate religion with patriarchy and the oppression of women. Although she agrees that traditional religion is patriarchal she argues that this is not in all religions and that some contain ‘religious forms of feminism’ which are ways in women use religion to gain social freedom and respect. For example Muslim women were the hijab, although this is seen as a form of oppression to some feminists, to the wearer it may symbolise resistance to oppression and liberation that enables them to enter the public sphere without losing their culture and history. Armstrong also argues that women have not always been subordinate to men in religion and that early religions placed women at the centre. However from about 4000 years ago, the rise of monotheistic religions saw the forming of a single, all powerful male God and prophets such as Jehovah and Abraham. This view is also supported by El Saadawi as she argues that religion is not the direct cause of the subordination of women and that it is a result of patriarchal forms of society coming into existence in the last few thousand years. For example, men reinterpreted religious beliefs in ways that favoured patriarchy and therefore religion now oppresses women.
Marxism and Feminism are conflict perspectives, however they both highlight the ideological functions of religion differently. Marxists see religion as dulling the pain of false class consciousness and also as a form of ideology that is a response to alienation whereas feminists see religion as an instrument of patriarchy. This is a set of beliefs and practices responsible for women’s subordination. However is argued that religion is not always patriarchal.
by
derek1 (student)
