Category: Gender Issues

Making Room for Women’s Voices

Posted on

I wanted to point out an intriguing post Rose Madrid-Swetman put up recently. As part of a reception Off the Map hosted related to the Seeds of Compassion event, she interviewed Rob Bell on the subject of women in ministry. She summarized the interview on her blog – here. But there were a couple of parts that really stood out to me.

First I liked the response from Rob (as summarized by Rose) about how he has come to view the whole women in ministry issue – He said that he used to hear the old argument that there are two sides to this theological position but now he says there are not two sides, if you hold to the position that oppresses (probably my word) women you are just wrong. I think this gets at the heart of the issue for many women. This isn’t about theology or esoteric debates, this is about oppression. And oppression is wrong. End of story. But most people really don’t get that.

The other part of the interview that stood out to me was Rob’s reaction to the question of how he uses his influence to help give voice to women. He apparently didn’t understand the question or why such a thing would be necessary. A small handful of “celebrity christian” speakers (like Brian McLaren) have made a point of not speaking at events that don’t give women a voice. They use the little power they have to help equalize the playing field and provide opportunities for those that are often overlooked. This isn’t about getting second rate speakers up there (as is often assumed), but making people aware of an issue that usually doesn’t cross the radar of conference planners. But Rob’s response was the more typical one – why is that needed?

I was interested in the comments around the web to Rose’s posing of this question. Some really didn’t get why having the voice of women present mattered at all (and of course others directly opposed such a thing altogether). Others wondered why important men like Rob should be forced to waste their time on the women’s issue. Others proposed that there are far greater issues in the world to pay attention to than than equality for women. Generally the same of excuses the church have given for years to avoid the issue. Sure they might think women should be in ministry and treated fairly, but why bother actually doing anything about it?

So I’m am grateful to women like Rose who are asking the hard questions (to prominent leaders at that) and who aren’t afraid to keep pushing for so-called beliefs to be actualized as reality.

Read more

God and Gender

Posted on

A couple of days ago, Mark Oestreicher posted his thoughts on gender pronouns for God. He described his lengthy journey into understanding that solely using male pronouns limits God and alienates many women. It is an open an honest reflection on how seeking to understand God and scripture better brought him to a place of seeing how he needs to be careful about how he speaks of God. First, I want to thank Mark for being one of the first men I have encountered who not only thinks this way, but believes it is important enough to discuss. This is a huge issue for a lot of women and a significant issue regarding truth and idolatry (my thoughts on that here). I appreciate men being willing to acknowledge that and challenge taboos to actually discuss it.

But of course his post has stirred much controversy. There are those fearful that Youth Specialties will take a similar stance (to which my reply is – “what? actually be biblical?”). They claim that they (as youth pastors) would not be allowed to attend YS events if YS said that God isn’t strictly male. I personally find it depressing that a church would promote idolatry over unity or truth. Others there though claimed that if one doesn’t believe God is male then one therefore doesn’t believe the Bible is inerrant (which I think they are inappropriately using as a synonym for true). I was just fascinated by the whole thing. I’m used to this topic being taboo, I’m used to being told that it’s just easier to use male default language, I’m used to people being uncomfortable with including female metaphors in their God talk, but I haven’t heard such extreme “God has a penis” rhetoric in a long time. Do these people really think they are being biblical? (have they studied the Bible???) Do they just really hate women? Are they so narcissistic that God can only exist in their own image? I know those are harsh questions, but have they ever really thought about it?

I thought I’d ramble on here with my questions since I didn’t want to jump into the mess over there. I know this whole topic has been a journey for me, and I still often default to male pronouns for God. But I’m convinced that if I want to be respectful to God, this is an issue I can’t ignore. I don’t want to limit God by the smallness of my biases and God is constantly pushing me into a deeper relationship. I can’t go back now.

Read more

Defining and Defending the Blog

Posted on

This past week fellow Daily Scribe blogger Nick Norelli asked the following questions on his blog – “Is a blog a blog if it doesn’t allow comments? And if it is then is it a blog worth reading?” My initial response was to answer “no” to both questions. Something may perhaps fit the technical definition of a blog and may even contain good information, but in my opinion, a good blog is one that allows conversation, that invites interaction and doesn’t hide dissenting opinions. I find blogs where the authors pontificate on their own opinions but don’t allow questions or criticisms to represent the height of arrogance. It’s even worse when comments appear to be allowed, but dissenting opinions are deleted or edited or when only pre-approved voices are allowed access. Now I’ve deleted a handful of comments here, but only the spam and the super-creepy sexual ones. I prefer the open comment policy. But from my experience the bloggers who don’t allow comments aren’t interested in conversation at all – just in attempting to get everyone to think they are right. They tell the world what to believe, or (more commonly) ridicule ideas or people they don’t like and then walk away. Sure some bloggers don’t have time to respond to every comment, but not allowing commentary at all seems like a way of avoiding responsibility for one’s opinions. But then again, I’m not a fan of having some authority on high telling me what I should believe without allowing me to question or examine their ideas.

These questions reminded me of the recent discussion we had over at the Emerging Women blog regarding the benefits blogging has brought to marginalized voices. In the church world where the voices of white men predominate (or are at least perceived to do so), blogs have provided women and others on the margins with the opportunity to have a voice. So I find it interesting that it is generally white males in positions of power who don’t allow comments on their blogs or who complain (on their blog) about too many voices out there blogging. Why? Some dislike the open source nature of blog discussion preferring instead good old traditional authority. Others think there are too many voices out there for conversation to be meaningful and therefore blogging should be restricted (to those with authority perhaps?). Others don’t like giving the “uneducated” or “unsupervised” the opportunity to have a voice. And perhaps some just want theirs to be the only voice that gets heard.

I admit, there can be issues with blogs. I’ve encountered the crazies out there (blogrush is such great entertainment – did you know that aliens will aid Jesus in his second coming by bringing him to Roswell??), I see the dangers of posting pictures of yourself partying in Cancun that any potential employer can google, and I’ve stuck my foot in my mouth on a few too many occasions – but I still support the freedoms it brings. I like that blogging helps me to examine my world and think critically about ideas I encounter. I like that I get pushed to justify my opinions (not that I always succeed at doing so). I like that as a mom who is often confined to the house I can have adult conversations and maintain friendships with people around the world. I like that women are breaking free from the lies the church has told them and realizing that yes, they can do theology and have a voice in these sorts of discussions. Without the blog many post-evangelical women would be left with no one to talk to, no one to encourage them, and no way to move forward in their faith. So for a man who has never experienced the same confines and dismissal as these women to say that our blogs are just noise that need to go away in order for the important voices to be better heard really irks me (even though I know that most of the men making such statements are not necessarily directing them at women).

I’m all for the conversation. I want to learn from others and I want to question, challenge, and clarify what I read online. To me, such interaction is the trademark of a good discussion, a good educational setting, or a good church not to mention a good blog. I find it frustrating these days to listen to a sermon or read a book and not be able to push deeper by questioning it. I recall the most frustrating classes in college were the ones where the profs refused to respond to questions – instead saying meaningless things like “that’s a good question” and continue on with their lecture. I didn’t want more notes to take, I wanted to engage with what I was learning. Blogs have provided me with that opportunity to continue learning by engaging my world. Sure I enjoy “real-life” conversations, but once a month or so is far too infrequent and I don’t have the babysitting funds for much more (and don’t even get me started on the local Feminist Thought Club I tried to join which ended up being a bunch of college guys trying to pick up women…). I need more than that.  So I am grateful for blogs and for the discussion they should support. I am not afraid of the hard questions nor do I think the “simple questions” are just creating noise. The opportunity to read and engage daily with others is needed at this stage in my life. For me, it’s what helps me grow.

Read more

Gender and Politics

Posted on

During the 1984 Presidential elections I was in 1st grade. My teacher had us fill out a mock election ballot put out by some children’s magazine as to who we would vote for if we could vote. In my astute understanding of how the entire process worked I voted for Geraldine A. Ferraro, Walter Mondale’s vice presidential candidate. My rational was as follows – since Reagan and Bush had already had a turn in the White House I thought it would be fair to let someone else have a turn. And given that there had never been a female President, I thought it was high time a woman got to take a turn at that as well. (I apparently got the whole playing fair and taking turns thing). So in the box under the pictures of Mondale and Ferraro, I shaded in only the half of the box under her side. I wanted to vote for a woman.

But I am not voting for Hillary Clinton in the Primaries (it could be a different story if she gets the nomination). But I have been intrigued by the media’s reports on the effects of gender on this campaign. Many are accusing Hillary supporters (quite a few who are 50-60 year old women) of voting for her just because she is a woman. I have a hard time with this. I am a firm advocate of the need to allow women to have a voice and the necessity of altering male-dominated systems to make that happen, but I don’t subscribe to the idea that one’s gender should be one’s sole qualifications for a position. But neither should it stand in the way.

I found Gloria Steinem’s recent op-ed piece in the New York Times on this issue to be intriguing. In the piece she states her support for Hillary and mentions the gender roadblocks she continues to face.

“So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects “only” the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more “masculine” for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren’t too many of them); and because there is still no “right” way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what.”(and for a challenge to her racism/sexism comments see this interview on Democracy Now!)

Hillary Clinton has hecklers demanding that she iron their shirts for them. Her win in New Hampshire gets attributed to her tears on national television – just sympathy votes for a woman. She is seen as divisive because of her sex. Women are called disloyal to their sex if they don’t vote for her, and biased by gender if they do. In all – the gender issue is still an issue.

I personally think we absolutely need more women in leadership in this country to bring in various perspectives and leadership styles and to serve as role models. But I have my reasons for voting as I do and I no longer vote as I did in first grade and am not voting for someone solely on her or his gender. Nor do I appreciate the accusation that gender based voting is the only reason one would ever vote for Hillary. But then again single issue voting is one of my many pet peeves. I find it sad that (at least in the media) this comes down to being about gender. I know it could represent a long overdue historic first for women, but I look forward to the day when “because she’s a woman” doesn’t have to be a factor either way.

Read more

The History of Cooking

Posted on

I recently caught part of a documentary on the history of cooking classes (yes, I was watching the Food Network).  I was struck by how the story behind something as basic as cooking revealed gender inequalities.  Essentially in pre-WW2 America, cooking was seen as woman’s work.  There was nothing glamorous or special about preparing food, it was just a means to the end of getting fed.  The first cooking classes were offered to poor women to teach them a skill they could use to earn a meager living (generally as a cook/maid for a wealthy family).  But after WW2 all of that changed.  The men who had learned to cook as soldiers returned home from war and sought to earn a living using their new-found skills.  All of a sudden cooking and working in newly created restaurants became a respectable middle class occupation that earned a decent living.  But of course it was only after men blessed the cooking world with their presence that cooking earned respect as a profession.   Even still everyday cooking is still considered woman’s work and gathers little respect, while professional cooking is dominated by men and is highly respected.

Hearing stories like that frustrates me.   To be reminded of what low value women have been given historically is sobering.  Our accomplishments and our work are deemed unimportant and not worthy of respect or decent pay (until men decide to join in as well).  The cynical side of me wants to call for more men to be stay-at-home parents to see if that will actually raise the respect level for that particular occupation.  I’m sure if enough men start doing it, they’d somehow start being paid to be a dad as well.

Not that I think any profession should ever be restricted to just men or women.  We all should be given equal respect (and pay) for whatever job we undertake no matter our gender.  But given the realities of history and our world today, that doesn’t always happen.  Women often don’t receive respect for their work and are still the minority in many fields dominated by men.  Often men don’t want to share the respect of their particular career with women (are they selfish or do they think we are not worthy?) or they don’t understand the difficulties women find when trying to enter those fields.  So as unfair as some have called it, it takes men sponsoring/encouraging/endorsing/apprenticing women to help us break into those fields as equals for women to even begin to be respected in the same way men are.  And while I don’t full agree that  it is unfair to help others, in these situations the inequality is even more unfair than the assistance, so why not “be unfair” in a positive way instead of a negative way?

I know this is just a typical gender issues rant, but the documentary irked me.  It of course presented the evolution of the cooking profession as a good thing no matter how telling it was of the rampant sexism in our country’s history.  I just wish the story would be different every once in awhile.

Read more

What is a Christian Feminist?

Posted on

A couple of weeks ago a friend sent me a link to a blog where a fundamentalist woman was posting about a woman’s true place in a biblical worldview. Her thoughts went beyond complementarian to the “women exist to serve men in the home by popping out babies” extreme. Apparently women can’t think, can’t question, and can never ever seek equality because God forbids it. In the comments it was concluded that feminism was created by Satan and that the term Christian Feminist is an oxymoron because according to God, they just can’t exist. While I was amused by the idea that according to God I have no ontological reality (and yes, I know she meant that if one is a feminist one obviously can’t be saved), it was still disturbing to hear women parroting the propaganda of oppression. I know it is her belief system and that it has meaning for her, but the fact that she isn’t allowed to encounter different viewpoints is indicative of the reality for too many women in the church.

So why am I bringing this up? Geoff over at Amateur Theology has asked a genuine question as to what is a Christian Feminist. He writes, “It sounds from the implication of the title that I’m having trouble reconciling Christianity with feminism. The truth, I’m afraid is that I’m far more ignorant than that. I just don’t have a solid grasp on a) what feminism really means in the here and now, and b) how that interplays with people’s faith.”

Makeesha has provided a great response and the comments there have sparked some good exploration of the term “feminist”. I’ll include here my contribution to the comments.

Feminist is a hard word because it is usually used as a negative label that is applied as a means to ridicule and dismiss. I’ve been in groups where generally open minded people actually say things like “well, I don’t think anyone here would go so far as to call themselves a feminist…” As if being a feminist is the most extreme out there thing one can be.

I do understand that there are various streams/waves of feminism and while I have serious issues with some of them (the ones that hate men or think that sexual openness means equality), I am not willing to give up the entire history of the movement because of some fringe views (kinda like I feel about Christianity). I am a feminist because I am a Christian. I believe all people are created in the image of God and are therefore worthy as imagebearers. We are all called to serve God in the ways we are called (in ministry, work, the home, school…) and to say otherwise is to stifle the will of God. Since it has been women who have generally been seen as inferior, I think feminism is necessary to overcome that lie.

In many ways, I would rather be a “peopleist” and work for all people to be allowed to be the people God made them to be. Men and women should not be fit into the molds of gender stereotypes and should be respected for who they are. But I think the goals of feminism still have a long way to go to just get basic respect for women established.

I know I’ve posted this graphic before, but I think it represents the historical tradition of feminism that I respect. There has been much achieved by the strong women who put it all on the line to get basic rights for women. Basic rights that as a Christian who loves God and respects how he created people I don’t understand how they could be denied. But denied they have been along with much more. I recently re-read Virginia Woolf’s classic A Room of One’s Own and was shocked at how little has changed in the past 80 years for women. We still have loud and powerful men asserting that they know women are inferior and detailing for us all that we are good for in this world. Our voice is still not heard in many circles, especially in the church. And it is still a struggle to get the average person to acknowledge that these issues even matter. For many out there there just seem to be way more important things to care about than how women are perceived and treated. I think there are a lot of things that should be more important, but getting basic decency, rights, and respect for women seems fairly important to me.

So I am a feminist. I think women are people too. I think we are worthy of respect and human rights. I think God is big enough to use whoever he wants to serve him. And I will stand up with feminists against those who out of fear or hatred try to tell God otherwise.

Read more

Objectifying Men

Posted on

Gender rant to follow.

So I don’t hide the fact that I own the label “feminist.” I know that in many circles feminist is the “f-word” and those who use it despised. And yes, I know that there are different waves and types of feminists. I get that. It’s complicated.

And I also get that one of the reasons feminism is so despised is because some feminists have exchanged misogyny for misandry. Instead of seeking equality of the sexes or even (the preferred imho) respect for all peoples, they promote women as better than men or seek to ridicule, deride, and humiliate men. For the record, I don’t support that sort of feminism. Anything that is based on hurting others in the name of selfish ambition is wrong. No question there.

But.

Sometimes I do wonder if the whole “walk a mile in another’s shoe” approach might be helpful. For some men it might just take being treated in the way they treat women for the message of equality to get across to them. And I’m not just talking about being the minority at events, getting talked over in conversations or having to wear the prosthetic pregnant belly either. I’m talking about the subtle (sometimes) sexual objectification of women. What if when a women got up to speak at an event, her husband was introduced only in reference to his physical appearance? And I thank Mike, my handsome and sexy husband for his support in being here with me tonight…. Or what if after a man preached, the congregants focused not on the content of his sermon but on the fact that his shirt really wasn’t a good color for him? Or how about expressing surprise that a well known women could manage to find such an attractive and intelligent husband? Could we try that for awhile? Do you think it would make a difference (or just backfire and feed the male ego?)

I guess I’m just sick of the references to women that while intending to be complements just continue to objectify and oppress us. It is not a novel thing that a woman is intelligent. And I know I am not a “beautiful” person, so it gets really demeaning when that is how I am referred to – did the person even bother to get to know me or did they just go with the old standby of commenting on a woman’s body? Do men really not get how belittling that can be? So I just think it could be a fun experiment to turn things around and treat men the way they treat us. Even if it doesn’t change things, it could still be interesting. A science experiment perhaps.

(and yes, in case you were wondering, listening to Gwen Stefani’s ‘Hollaback Girl’ prompted this post. shake them bananas, B-A-N-A-N-A-S….)

Read more

Struggle to Know

Posted on

I recently started reading Postcolonial Imagination & Feminist Theology by Kwok Pui-lan. The book is stretching me in many ways as it forces me to view my faith through an utterly foreign lens. It’s a good thing, but it can be a tad overwhelming at points. More on all that later. I just wanted to share tonight the words the author uses to open the first chapter. She writes –

I have been reflecting on my long intellectual journey to “struggle to know.” Why is knowing a struggle? It is a struggle because you have to spend years learning what others told you is important to know, before you acquire the credentials and qualifications to say something about yourself. It is a struggle because you have to affirm first that you have something important to say and that your experience counts.

I have no clue if this is something that white western men can understand experientially (if it is my apologies for negating your journey), but this is the story I have lived and that I have heard told to me by others. It’s the struggle women face when they attempt to have a voice or be a leader. When the world that is constructed for us looks one way, but our experiences and our self awareness reveal something else entirely, it is more than just difficult to find our place in that world. When all that we know about life, history, religion is slanted in a certain direction, to step up and use our voice is not such as easy thing. When to just be ourselves challenges all that is accepted, holy and dear in the world, it becomes all that much harder to speak out and attempt to make a difference. When we are mocked, labeled, and dismissed for believing that our experience counts, it truly is an ongoing struggle.

Read more

Sippy Cup Exposé

Posted on


So to combine my mommy blogging and my rants on gender issues, I give you the Sippy Cup Exposé. I was looking at Emma’s sippy cups recently and noticed that we had a set of Playtex sippy cups that seriously played into gender stereotypes. The cups are pink and blue. The blue cup displays fish (in a school) undergoing academic pursuits. They are learning the ABC’s, looking at a globe, and using a ruler. The pink cup on the other hand has personified teacups, fruit, and flowers. WTF!

I am so sick of being faced with gender specific assumptions when I get anything for Emma. The whole pink and blue thing is everywhere – it’s hard to avoid exposing her to the idea that pink=girls and blue=boys. All the clothes are pink and purple covered in flowers, hearts, princesses, or ballet shoes. And now the sippy cups get involved too. So what does it matter that I let her use the blue=academic/intellectual cup? She knows that the pink one is for girls and so sees that girls are associated with tea parties and flowers while boys are associated with learning and school. I’m sure people will say that I’m overreacting and am too sensitive, but I’m just finding it really difficult to avoid imparting to my daughter oppressive gender roles. Does the world really have to promote cultural stereotypes on freaking sippy cups? This gets more annoying everyday…

Read more