“Shaming is one of the deepest tools of imperialist, white supremacist, capitalist patriarchy because shame produces trauma and trauma often produces paralysis.” - bell hooks
I’m thankful that to some degree, it’s common to publish your words and think about how one would write things differently or add certain elements after they have been printed and released in final form. And yet, there are some things in particular I’ve written that I wish I had been more critical of in my own writing, particularly in not emphasizing the many ways in which trauma can be weaponized, and our own sympathies may be found in misguided places.
It’s for this reason I want to talk about Saul as a morally injured character as I depict him in chapter three in my book Trauma Talks in the Hebrew Bible: Speech Act Theory and Trauma Hermeneutics, and the depiction of such in 1 Samuel 28 with the “witch” of En-Dor, where now my own internalized misogynistic frameworks embodied in himpathy are quite clear to me.
For reference, himpathy is a term coined by philosopher Kate Manne in her work, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Manne demonstrates aptly how in instances between perpetrators and victims, especially if the perpetrator is a man, our sympathies tend to be found with the male, dominant figure in systems of hierarchy; and in some instances, tend to ignore the victim, often female, contributing to what is called “herasure.”
What may be more helpful here is to outline the supposed “logic” of misogyny. Manne describes misogyny as policing behaviors, either rewarding or punishing those based on their adherence to the patriarchal system in which women are expected and obligated to give feminine-coded goods, and not take what is rightfully for men, those being masculine-coded goods. Men can be human beings, and women can be human givers.
The premise of chapter three is that Saul is quite harmed by the very system and person of YHWH that he adheres to, or at least, attempts to follow. Thus, less moral injury because of combat, moreso moral injury because of his relationships with YHWH and Samuel as representative of such. Setting the stage for the ways in which he has been pushed and pulled, acknowledging the actions Saul does out of deep shame, and moving into this pericope where he interacts with the witch of En-dor in 1 Samuel 28 (I call her a witch due to my own positionality of reclaiming said term as loving the “monstrous feminine,” but she is literally a necromancer, a spirit-wife/woman). While I discuss the fact that this woman is marginalized and oppressed due to Saul’s actions, and I have actually worked before on the pieces of hypocrisy as mirroring current "pro-life" behaviors here in the United States, she gets little more than a paragraph about how it is extremely unfortunate that she, in the face of having to survive, does not actually get the opportunity to thrive. This is important, and yet, the chapter’s whole discussion focuses in on Saul, who because of the witch, may have in his final actions begun to alchemize the abusive relationships of YHWH-ism, although it is clearly too late. “If Saul as character shows tragic symbolism for those in exile of what it looks like to follow after a god who seems to not want you to thrive, was this action a way to legitimate another path, even as YHWH still maintains power?”
Once again, this is all well and good. And yet, when I considered this chapter after reading Manne’s work, I could not help but see my himpathy for Saul. He uses the witch for his own power and does not change the structures of oppression that he has power to change that harm her. I myself use the witch and her giving as a way to describe this system as it so benefitted and continues to benefit Saul, thereby contributing to herasure. Now that the book is off and published, its due time to address this miss on my part. Ironically, if the goal in herasure is to avoid feeling ashamed of one’s actions, to take the gaze off of what we/he has done, to displace our shame on to her, I make her out to be more pitiful than shameful, but remove shame from Saul nonetheless. And yet, shame is unproductive, period.
“Listening and offering sympathy to those who are prone to shame-based misogynistic as well as racist outbursts is feeding the very need and sense of entitlement that drives them in the first place, when they go unmet. In other words, it’s adding fuel to the fire, at least in the long term. You can’t do much to help or give to someone who, yes, is in genuine pain and lashing out—but only because they feel too needy and illicitly entitled to getting such moral attentions to begin with. The liberal impulse is therefore misplaced here, unless we want to get stuck feeding the need-monster forever. As many white women indeed appear to be committed to doing, when it comes to the white men they’ll remain loyal to notwithstanding their sexual misconduct (among other things).” - Kate Manne (290)
Manne’s book ends on a note of pessimism, and rightfully so. The cost of shifting our perspectives, of shifting systems, requires a “greater strength and moral lucidity” that many are not rewarded for having. Therefore, many people will not feel the need to obtain that strength and lucidity.
I was on a podcast talking about my book recently, in which we talked about these things at play not only in this chapter about Saul, but also in current discourse in the United States. There was much more that I could have and possibly, should have been said, about how the avoidance of teaching history accurately due to claims that it “makes white kids feel bad” and that change is costly and chaotic because of the unknowns, but that the supposed price for treating people as equal and creating a more equitable society is extremely worthwhile. (Am I uncomfortable or unsafe?)
But I didn’t love the language I used there. And while I can make excuses for myself both in the book and in the podcast, I want to be clear.
When we only talk about the “cost” of change, we absolutely fail to admit that there has always been a cost to maintaining these oppressive structures, but those costs have never been seen as a loss for those who benefit. When we talk about the cost of change, we have to realize that centering the losses can further entrench people into their terrible ill-logic, creating disgruntled, shame-filled beings that will find a “release-valve” (i.e. any of the white back-lash we’ve seen per any semblance of supposed “progress”) which is often violent and will continue to maintain the harmful system under the guise of change, therefore displacing their shame onto those same bodies who were already paying the price. When we center the cost and loss in change, the chaos that ensues as we attempt to figure out a new normal, we say explicitly that some bodies are worth more than others. Who deserves our sympathy?
“We would rather be ruined than changed/ We would rather die in our dread / than climb the cross of the moment / and let our illusions die.” - W.H. Auden
If we don’t talk about the cost the witch pays every day for existing in such a system, even as Saul himself is harmed by it too, then we ourselves are implicated. Switch out those two characters for a myriad of others.
I can talk about shame as being unhelpful all day long, and that shame must be moved through, “you need to feel it to heal it;” but ultimately, if feeling shame is used as an excuse to justify behavior as I may have done in the name of being trauma-informed, and becomes an arena in which systems are still being fed and upheld in the name of caring, there has got to be a better way. Weaponizing our traumas only breeds more trauma.
Less shame (I am bad), perhaps more guilt (action is bad). Differentiating these two is essential. We must learn to move from an ethics of good intentions to an ethics of responsibility, in the words of Frankie Codon. May we have the strength, and if not, start working out those muscles.
“we don’t cancel people, we cancel bad ideas and behaviors that hurt people. we stop the bleeding and find the root cause of disease and give people room to recover and repair. we are one people, with many wounds. our imaginations are full of repair…see yourself as a fractal of an era of massive ideological transformation in which care and repair become our human focus. imagine a future in which everyone who ever has been, or is currently being, treated as disposable and less than miraculous was instead recognized as precious, holy, and worthy of everything you and your children are worthy of.” - adrienne maree brown
We have an opportunity. We get to do better.