What is a covering?

If you grew up in the Christian church, you’ve heard this phrase “to be covered.”

Especially for women: “you need to be under a covering of a good God-fearing man.” In most of the churches I grew up in (usually contemporary and/or non-denominational churches in the American South,) that God-fearing man could be your father, your pastor, or your husband. If you didn’t have one of the three, you weren’t covered and likely a “jezebel” [cue murder scream.]

Depending on how deep the thirst for control goes, this covering could come with purity and chastity vows where (if you, like me, had the unfortunate case of my father and my pastor being the same person) the father might feel entitled to any and all information about your sex life.

I believe there is a similar concept in Muslim traditions where women need a chaperone of some kind to be with them. (I am not Muslim I have just had Muslim friends so please chime in here with corrections! I will point out that I am not referring to the Hijab when I talk about this concept of ‘covering’ because as I understand it, that is between the Hijabi and Allah and their relationship, not about external chaperoning.)

Of course, to anyone who is paying attention, this “covering” concept directly mirrors the historically accurate practice we see so decadently illustrated in Bridgerton: needing an older brother or father chaperone in order to maintain the pristine nature of your chastity.

Assets Protection is what they call that at Target, by the way. Making sure that the goods (chaste brides) make it to the consumers (the husbands) undamaged.

You see the link between gender-based oppression and capitalism; the direct link between Christian propaganda and colonialist tactics??

So we raise this generation of women (or at least presumed women) with this idea that they must be “covered” to be

-protected

-safe

-able to eat (couldn’t have own bank accounts until the 70s)

-righteous

-holy

-acceptable by society

And we actively vilify anyone who chooses to live outside of that paradigm

-trans men

-trans women

-fat women (bc they’re “less desirable” and thus not really a commodity)

-old women

-lesbians

-witches/non- Christians in general

-women who unabashedly have sex with whom ever they want

-women who decide to not remove their body hair infinite shrugging emojis

Like. You get it.

But my question is, before capitalism, before the patriarchy got its evil grubby insecure little egotistical claws into Mother Earth’s beautiful perfectness, who was covering the women?

Was it not the sky? And all that thrives under?

And why is that not good enough for us now?

I’ve decided it is good enough for me, to be covered by clouds and rain and creation. To believe that the same tides that rotate the planet on time around the sun rotate me on time too. I am where I need to be and covered by nothing. Because it is not mine to be squished, flattened, busheled. It is mine to bloom.

Men (and those who insist on upholding the patriarchy) should consider that their own lack of covering is why their mental health is so bad. Go outside and look up, bro.

A June Day in Pittsburgh, one of the first sunny days after almost a month of storms & rain.