Sisters crossing their legs

[Gabriela]

5 hours ago, Julie said:

Is this a common thing? 

I would think that communities would LIKE menstrual cups. They seem more in keeping with poverty (one cup for years versus who knows how many pads.) not to mention less messy.

Also, I don't think you need to experience sex to make a comparison in order to see that, for normal women, internal menstrual hygiene stuff doesn't cause problems for chastity. When I first read your post, it didn't even occur to me that THAT could be the reason for having rules about it. I thought it HAD to be something more like "it's kind of luxurious to demand a ton of choices. We have what we have at the convent, make do with that."

I can't say how common it is around the world, but I know I've encountered it in more than one community, and I can tell you their reasons were not poverty but a fear of some mortal sin taking place over the commode. I, like you, thought that menstrual cups must be a godsend for religious communities, but oh boy was I wrong...  I've found that poverty, like obedience, is subject to very idiosyncratic interpretations across orders and houses. Some communities do things in the name of poverty that others find terribly luxurious, and others look at the things some do for poverty and think that's a distortion of what poverty means. It's all down to the history of the particular community, so far as I can tell. What bothers me isn't the differences, but the feeling a lot of communities have that theirs is the true or best way of understanding or living poverty/obedience/whatever, rather than realizing that their way is largely arbitrary and they could do it a dozen other ways but don't because of historical accidents.

28 minutes ago, Julie said:

Not as much as you'd think. They're pretty popular in the dorms at my school (most people have 5+ siblings, which combined with tuition necessitates frugality), and the experience sharing a bathroom is much better than when the trashcans filled up with pads (which is what happened before the cup caught on here). (I'm pretty sure that's the grossest sentence I've ever typed, sorry.) 

LOL, but totally true. At least in the sink, it's washed out and gone. In the trash can... oh, Lawd!

23 minutes ago, Quasar said:

To be blunt, are we sure the concern in regulating these items isn't simply the integrity of the hymen?  

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if it were. But how could we discover the truth about that? And honestly, with the histories of women entering today—many of them having lived... erm... "normal lives" in the world before their conversion/discernment—if this is the reason, then it's totally out of date.

And frankly, even back in the day, if this were the reason, I doubt God cared half as much about the intactness of our hymens as other people did. As if having an intact hymen would somehow make us holier... 

[katherineH]

I created a meme but I couldn't figure out how to post it, so I'll just describe it for you.

Bad Luck Brian: starts thread about crossing legs, turns into thread about hymens and used hygiene products. 

[Gabriela]

9 hours ago, katherineH said:

I created a meme but I couldn't figure out how to post it, so I'll just describe it for you.

Bad Luck Brian: starts thread about crossing legs, turns into thread about hymens and used hygiene products. 

[Sister Leticia]

Re tampons/cups/pads: I don't think this is only about virginity and religious sisters. I think there is a wider fear/anxiety/sense of shame around women's bodies, and what a "good" Catholic woman does or doesn't do. This thread has made me remember how, a while back a Facebook friend (who is a devout Catholic) posted a link to a blog by a Catholic wife and mother. There was a post about how she was praying devoutly during Mass, convinced her children were behaving well as they normally did, when her toddler started rummaging in her handbag and out spilled its contents, with tampons flying about the place. My friend commented something like "how embarrassing" and there were a few more comments made by her friends, none of whom I know. Two of them, judging by their photos aged 35-45, wrote something like this:

A: but what's a good Catholic wife doing with tampons?

B: my thoughts exactly, I mean, that area should be husband only.

My mind boggled!!

Earlier in this thread someone speculated about whether the people who make rules about towels v tampons/cups are concerned about sexual arousal. I'd say only someone who has never, ever inserted a tampon can possibly imagine it's in any way arousing! - but seriously, there clearly are many women, married as well as celibate, who have these fears and concerns, and who are perpetuating them by passing them on to their daughters.

I also have some more thoughts about the original issue of leg-crossing, posture, control etc, but I'll keep that for another post, so this one doesn't become too long.

[DameAgnes]

1 hour ago, Sister Leticia said:

 

A: but what's a good Catholic wife doing with tampons?

B: my thoughts exactly, I mean, that area should be husband only.

 

Sometimes you just want to smack people upside the head.

[beatitude]

1 hour ago, Sister Leticia said:

Two of them, judging by their photos aged 35-45, wrote something like this:

A: but what's a good Catholic wife doing with tampons?

B: my thoughts exactly, I mean, that area should be husband only.

My mind boggled!!

If I had been privy to that discussion, I would probably have intervened with this helpful explanatory link.

And also pointed out that when inserted into candleholders string side up, they could potentially make very good votive offerings when stocks are low in the church.

[Gabriela]

19 minutes ago, beatitude said:

If I had been privy to that discussion, I would probably have intervened with this helpful explanatory link.

And also pointed out that when inserted into candleholders string side up, they could potentially make very good votive offerings when stocks are low in the church.

I want the chandelier and the combat costume!

[beatitude]

1 hour ago, Gabriela said:

I want the chandelier and the combat costume!

Well, you've got a few days before Halloween. It might leave you short of some necessities for the month but on the plus side you would be a sight to behold, opening the door to trick-or-treaters wearing such a costume.

(Debate over whether orthodox Catholics are permitted to wear tampon costumes on Halloween in three...two...one...)

[Egeria]

Regarding leg-crossing, this is considered disrespectful in Orthodox Churches (at least in the Greek tradition - I'm not entirely sure if it's universal), so it's not just about being ladylike as this applies just as much to men. It seems to have culural roots regarding what is appropriate in worship that have been to some extent lost in the West.

However, I have to say that I am somewhat taken aback at some of this discussion. I tend to readily identify with those who complain about the diffierences between women's and men's monasteries, and the small-mindedness often found in women's communities. But posture is fundamental to worship, at least in the historic Christian tradition and especially in monasticism. It is a form of language that literally forms us and shapes our response to God. And once you have been formed by this, seeing people sitting casually in choir with their legs crossed is profoundly disruptive. This isn't a matter of just obeying rules, but of entering into the language of a community and allowing oneself to be formed by it. Indeed, I suspect that for most monastics this isn't about rules at all, but of simply growing into an atmosphere of worship.

Moreover, it's certainly not just a female thing. I know several men's monasteries where it would be unheard of to sit with folded legs in choir.

It is also worth noting that the traditional Christian posture for prayer is standing. Sitting is already an accomodation to our weakness (witness the medieval misericord that enabled monks to half-sit and half-stand), which is surely reason to main a centered, reverent, attentive pose when sitting.

[katherineH]

3 hours ago, Egeria said:

Regarding leg-crossing, this is considered disrespectful in Orthodox Churches (at least in the Greek tradition - I'm not entirely sure if it's universal), so it's not just about being ladylike as this applies just as much to men. It seems to have culural roots regarding what is appropriate in worship that have been to some extent lost in the West.

However, I have to say that I am somewhat taken aback at some of this discussion. I tend to readily identify with those who complain about the diffierences between women's and men's monasteries, and the small-mindedness often found in women's communities. But posture is fundamental to worship, at least in the historic Christian tradition and especially in monasticism. It is a form of language that literally forms us and shapes our response to God. And once you have been formed by this, seeing people sitting casually in choir with their legs crossed is profoundly disruptive. This isn't a matter of just obeying rules, but of entering into the language of a community and allowing oneself to be formed by it. Indeed, I suspect that for most monastics this isn't about rules at all, but of simply growing into an atmosphere of worship.

Moreover, it's certainly not just a female thing. I know several men's monasteries where it would be unheard of to sit with folded legs in choir.

It is also worth noting that the traditional Christian posture for prayer is standing. Sitting is already an accomodation to our weakness (witness the medieval misericord that enabled monks to half-sit and half-stand), which is surely reason to main a centered, reverent, attentive pose when sitting.

Very insightful comment. Thank you for sharing.  I agree that posture is much more than abiding to social standards of feminist and masculinity, it reflects our attitude towards liturgy, and the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. 

[Gabriela]

5 hours ago, Egeria said:

Regarding leg-crossing, this is considered disrespectful in Orthodox Churches (at least in the Greek tradition - I'm not entirely sure if it's universal), so it's not just about being ladylike as this applies just as much to men. It seems to have culural roots regarding what is appropriate in worship that have been to some extent lost in the West.

However, I have to say that I am somewhat taken aback at some of this discussion. I tend to readily identify with those who complain about the diffierences between women's and men's monasteries, and the small-mindedness often found in women's communities. But posture is fundamental to worship, at least in the historic Christian tradition and especially in monasticism. It is a form of language that literally forms us and shapes our response to God. And once you have been formed by this, seeing people sitting casually in choir with their legs crossed is profoundly disruptive. This isn't a matter of just obeying rules, but of entering into the language of a community and allowing oneself to be formed by it. Indeed, I suspect that for most monastics this isn't about rules at all, but of simply growing into an atmosphere of worship.

Moreover, it's certainly not just a female thing. I know several men's monasteries where it would be unheard of to sit with folded legs in choir.

It is also worth noting that the traditional Christian posture for prayer is standing. Sitting is already an accomodation to our weakness (witness the medieval misericord that enabled monks to half-sit and half-stand), which is surely reason to main a centered, reverent, attentive pose when sitting.

I agree with katherineH that this is a very insightful and eloquently stated observation. I don't disagree with the importance of posture in worship. Where I differ (I think...) is in the idea that religious communities ought to regulate individual posture. Of course, there's a limit: If a person's posture really is disruptive of the community's peace, then it should be corrected. But in the West today, I don't think there's much a nun would do to really disrupt others at worship. Put her feet up on the choir stall? It's a problem. But cross her legs? Mind your own business! In the East, though, if that really is culturally obnoxious, then regulate it.

Basically, I think we can all grow into the life of prayer and love of God, and bring our posture along with us. But I also think that's something each woman should be allowed to grow into on her own (again, unless she's really disruptive). And I think that, anytime I or we or a community thinks it's appropriate to correct an individual, I/we/that community ought to ask: Where is this urge to correct coming from, and is this something the person really needs to have corrected, or would it be better to let her get there on her own?