The Bible, Gender, and the 'Dad-Mom' Debate
Editor's Note: Owen Strachan, professor of theology and church history at Boyce College in Louisville, recently wrote a post critiquing a Tide commercial on "Dad Moms" as one more indication that our culture denigrates true masculinity. His post elicited strong responses from Her.meneutics writers. Amid a flurry of tweets, Strachan offered to engage Laura Ortberg Turner in a point-counterpoint. Here is Laura's response.
First, a confession:
I really don't want to like you, Owen.
And I'm disappointed in (although not entirely surprised by) myself for having that reaction first. This is an issue that gets my blood boiling more quickly than almost any other, and after reading your blog post about "Dad Men" and the cultural decline of masculinity, my first response was toward division, away from unity, and toward a mentality that says that if you don't agree with me, you must be wrong. I am sorry for that.
To be clear, I still think you are wrong on this particular issue. But the far more important thing than who is vindicated by a jury of our peers—because we will both have our supporters and detractors—is that you are my brother in Christ, and that no amount of ambiguous biblical interpretation can do anything to that truth. So with that confession, an apology to you, and a commitment to treat you with love and repentance when I fail.
To the issue at hand, a few important areas of disagreement and discussion:
First, the distinction between working "at home" and "outside the home" (as you make in referring to Titus 2:5) is mostly a false one in that it reads the Industrial Revolution into the ancient texts. We find both men and women at work throughout the Bible, but in those times, work (largely agrarian) was not something that people left home to do. Being busy at home also meant being busy at work.
First Corinthians 12 reminds us that we are all of us given spiritual gifts by our God for the purpose of building up his kingdom. How is a woman, relegated to the world of the home, able to discover and pursue her spiritual gifts when she is told that because of her gender she must run the household with, as you mentioned, only occasional help from her husband with the dishes? When we assign roles to any person strictly on account of gender, we miss out on an abundance of gifts that person could bring to the table by first paying attention to their giftedness. If a woman chooses freely to stay home with her children, wonderful! But first she should know the "manifestation of the Spirit for the common good" that she, uniquely, possesses. She will so quickly lose herself and her ability to contribute to the kingdom if she has no choice in her vocation. Rebekah Lyons wrote about this beautifully in her Q Ideas article, "Why Are All the Women Fading?": "This displacement of a mother's purpose (beyond child-rearing) becomes a huge loss to our communities. If women aren't empowered to cultivate their uniqueness, we all suffer the loss of beauty, creativity and resourcefulness they were meant to contribute to the world."
To add a comment you need to be a registered user or Christianity Today subscriber.
or
or
Bless These Hands That Instagram My Food
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Pinterest
Comments
Displaying 1–10 of 25 comments
See all comments
Becky Wooley
Dearest God, Please, never let me use my gender as an excuse for anything you may need me to do.
Martin Jacobs
The order of events in Genesis suggests that sex and work were both created as part of God's good order before the fall (Gen 3). How else were Adam and Eve to obey the command to "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it..." (Gen 1:28)? So, if these very human dimensions were not introduced to humanity by the fall, what was? I suggest, in a word, futility; the futility of knowing that your childrens' lives are meaningless and your work is pointless (Gen 3:16-19, in a neat parallel to Gen 1:28). Such is a life without God. In the context of this discussion, I read Genesis to mean that the meanings of both masculinity and femininity are void without God. Further, they don't find their meaning by being the opposite of the other, but in relation to their Creator. With this in mind, I am not threatened by the femininity of the women in my life, but I know I do things differently. The humbling wonder of it is that God is there, in the loving union between the two genders, and that renews my respect for the "opposite" sex.
Doreen Ashley
@ Steve Skeete - My comments about the "weaknesses" of men were satirical. I know some women as prone to aggression as some men. My point is that if you can claim that the biology of women produces weaknesses in them, why can't that same argument be made about men? Men are perfect in their biology? This is the message Eldridge, Driscoll and co., that their biological nature has been too repressed and needs to be embraced in its fullness. How come we are always quick to point out women's shortcomings, but never men's? The Bible says all struggle with the flesh.
Doreen Ashley
"First, the distinction between working at home and outside the home (as you make in referring to Titus 2:5) is mostly a false one in that it reads the Industrial Revolution into the ancient texts. We find both men and women at work throughout the Bible, but in those times, work (largely agrarian) was not something that people left home to do. Being busy at home also meant being busy at work." Thank you for including this point that is so often missed in the discussion of male/female roles based on Scripture. Most people fail to see that much of what is presented in Christian circles of what women "should" do is only possible in modern, affluent, Western society. Throughout vast parts of the world and most of human history, this discussion was irrelevant because everybody had to work all day long to survive. We are so entrenched in our current cultural norms that we fail to see it as such and project it onto Scripture as being a Biblical norm. In order to provide a disclaimer of any bias I might possess - I work 2 days per week and my husband works 3 days per week so that one of us is always home to care for our children and aging parents. And we are both adamant that while effort is involved in all that we do, there is a vast difference between what we do in a paid employment setting and what we do at home. I would not call my kids my job. I think it demeans them and I don't need to do that to elevate my own identity.
K. Smith
Well said Laura! It's nice to read an article that actually uses good logic.
Gina
Eric Jessen's got a point in his comment, about how truly hard it is to be a servant. It seems that, on any site where single Christian men congregate, there are all these calls to be Christian warriors and fight lots of battles and be tough as nails and all the rest. Then someone calls them to step up and start asking girls out and forming committed relationships, and all of a sudden all we hear is "But it's HAAAARD! Women are SCARY and MEAN!" :-) Yes, it's hard to serve. For men and for women. But if you say that a challenge is what you want out of life, then just realize that the challenge is going to be -- surprise! -- hard.
David Grant
MOM'S IMPRESSIVE JOB DESCRIPTION Author and preacher Tony Campola said that when his wife, Peggy, was at home full time with their children and someone would ask, "And what is it that you do, my dear?" she would respond: 'I AM SOCIALIZING TWO HOMO SAPIENS INTO THE DOMINANT VALUES OF THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN TRADITION IN ORDER THAT THEY MIGHT BE INSTRUMENTS FOR THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE SOCIAL ORDER INTO THE KIND OF ESCHATOLOGICAL UTOPIA THAT GOD WILLED FROM THE BEGINNING OF CREATION." Then Peggy would ask the other person, "And what do you do?"
rachel @ even one sparrow
Well said. Really well said.
Newly Karen
@Steve Skeete I really did not know that being violence, hot-tempered and insensitive were caused by testosterone. If they are then quite a few women, it would seem, have the exact hormonal problem as men do. Are we to believe that estrogen produces vanity, jealousy, and possessiveness? Because if so, then many men have too much of this hormone since they suffer from these same defects as well. Violence is a possible end result - but yes, a person with more testosterone in their veins (it should be noted that women do have testosterone) is more likely to be violent. This isn't just a cultural issue; it's a biological one. The exact way it works is still unknown. Insensitivity can be hormonal or cultural. The wrong hormone (in a transgender/intersex person like myself, for example) can make someone partially or completely insensitive to others emotions - I myself went from being almost sociopathic to being a "social butterfly" that loves to chat with people. Overall, though, it's more cultural than hormonal. Vanity, possessiveness and jealousy being tied to Estrogen? Both sexes have plenty of each, they just display in different ways.
Steve Skeete
I must say I enjoyed the comments more than I did the original post. Nadine said "It drives me crazy how masculinity is rarely portrayed as a weakness, yet femininity is. "Why shouldn't men strive against the weakness of their testosterone - a weakness for violence, hot-temperedness, insensitivity, etc.? I really did not know that being violence, hot-tempered and insensitive were caused by testosterone. If they are then quite a few women, it would seem, have the exact hormonal problem as men do. Are we to believe that estrogen produces vanity, jealousy, and possessiveness? Because if so, then many men have too much of this hormone since they suffer from these same defects as well. The bottom line is it is our sinful nature bolstered by the culture and nurture, I believe, that account for the negative behaviour of men and women. The Bible speaks clearly to that when it says "for all have sinned..." Women are as prone to violence as men, as all surveys on physical child abuse clearly demonstrates.
*