Christianity as vector of male hegemony

Yesterday the country commemorated Martin Luther king, Jr. amid complaints that social criticisms were omitted from references to his most famous speeches. Some complained that his socialism was overlooked.

So, although I try to ignore the recurring celebration of personalities, especially after they are dead, I turned to wikipedia to learn whether the preacher had ever done a day of work. Turned out that, as a college student, he got a summer job in Connecticut to pick tobacco and take in the sights after work in an integrated world. Other than that, the man whose name was changed by his father after a visit to Germany, mostly depended on the family’s commercialization of religion to sustain him.

Neither the physical abuse doled out by the father, nor his domination of wife and children come as a surprise. It has long been obvious that male hegemony appeals to blacks as well as whites and the exploitation of women is a constant. Perhaps it might be worth while to note that the confusion between socialist and socialites is quite common. Socialites are status seekers, who actively resent the egalitarianism of the socialist.

The Kings were and are socialites. Perhaps it is an inherited stance. How did so many descendants of slaves get to be named King and Queen and Doctor?

Can male hegemony be separated from a religion that preaches all men are the children of a pater who sacrificed his son? Is that not a denial of basic reality, of what people could observe with their own eyes? Is that the birth of the fiction that has tried to dominate the globe for two thousand years?