Typical feminism

@Steve Skeete -- May I suggest that you re-read what I wrote earlier since it isn't at all what you claim? I disagreed with the positions she took, said that some of her positions were hurtful, and I even suggested that she was not informed about the breadth of God-given talents amoung Christian women since she seems to cite only women who fit the old, stereotypical paradigm. But, the notion that I thereby called into question whether Feinberg is "a good woman, a caring woman, ... possibly, not a woman at all" is just silly. In fact, I specifically said that "much of what she writes is warm and heartfelt" and that I recognized that she "probably didn't mean" to cause the hurtfulness that I identified. I'm happy for Feinberg and the women she identifies to pursue the gifts that God has given them and for them all to live "into who [they] believe[] God created [them] to be." In fact, I expressly said that we should "always ... value women gifted in other than leadership roles." I'm not the one who doesn't want other women to be free to carry out what they are gifted to do. Rather, it is Feinberg's "not now" mantra that continues to make it all the more difficult for more generations of women who may be gifted differently from her to have the same freedom she seeks for herself. I did not at all say that every woman "has to fight every 'gender' battle that there is." In fact, I expressly wrote that I do not believe everything needs to be about gender all the time. Feinberg, however, goes to the opposite extreme: Waiting to address gender issues until every other problem in the world is solved essentially means that her "not now" mantra amounts to "never." Had the church taken that position on racial issues, slavery would still exist.

I read recently about a young man who was pulled over by two white police officers for making a wrong turn on a highway. He was trying to explain to the officers that he felt he was being followed and was seeking to lose the person(s) tailing him. Even though he admitted to breaking the law, he still felt the reason the police had "interrogated" and given him a "hard time" was because he was, you guessed it, black. Some people just have to bring race, gender, class etc. into everything. Then there is Ms. Feinberg. She says that there are other things more important, in her estimation, and that informs her life much more than gender, and apparently, other women find that infuriating. Somehow, for a woman to not be overly concerned about "gender issues" is not being a good woman, a caring woman, an informed woman, possibly, not a woman at all. Since when can a woman not live her own life, be her own woman, chart her own course, without having to feel that she has to fight every "gender" battle that there is? So "Sheila Frost" a woman who "barely leaves the house" is not your idea of a genuine "heroine". Maybe when you walk into a room, you want your "amazing leaders, thoughtful presenters, and compelling communicators" to be all or mostly women". You may even wish the day would come when no woman would dare say “Men are often the gatekeepers for raising up women leaders". Irks you doesn't it. Ms. Feinberg says “I don’t really think about it" and you can't take it. However you are not Margaret Feinberg. All she wants to do is live "into who she believes God created her to be." How come that is good for you and not for her? Here is my unsolicited advice - "go ahead with your own life", fight your gender wars and leave Ms. Feinberg to write, teach and speak, in other words "to do what she feels called to do"!

Feinberg: "These two women were QUIET but effective advocates ...." CT: "I asked her about some women in her own life whom she’s recognized as conduits of God. Her response drew to mind the QUIET yet significant role Christian women often play ...." Feinberg: "From an early age, Feinberg believed that she was created for relationship with God. She attributes this to many factors, including primarily the daily morning sight of her mother QUIETLY reading Scripture ...." Feinberg, on a woman who made a "tremendous impact": "She 'BARELY [LEFT] THE HOUSE ....'" (emphasis added) Good grief! Feinberg seems to fall prey to the very gender stereotyping she tries to avoid. I would suggest she needs to think a lot more deeply about gender issues than she has so far because certainly the examples she gives here, when being pressed on the gender issue, belie a profound lack of familiarity with the God-given gifts of so many faithful women over the centuries who are neither "quiet" nor who "barely [leave] the house." On Feinberg's own blog, a guest blogger quotes Feinberg as saying about women in leadership, “I wonder why we’re even talking about this when there are so many needs around the world? ... Now is not the time. When every starving person has food, when every homeless person has a place to live, when every well is dug, when AIDS has been eradicated in Africa, when all of our neighbors know Jesus, then we can sit and debate about titles and who should do what.” Feinberg's guest blogger goes on to say: "Changing the gender and racial disparity in her spiritual community will not happen overnight, nor by strong-arming women and minorities into the Christian 'stratosphere,' she [Feinberg] said. 'You can’t just take someone, no matter who it is, and throw them in front of a crowd of 40,000 people,' she said. 'Change has to start at the grassroots level, in all of our churches.' Church leaders need to start young, she said, training boys and girls alike to identify their spiritual gifts and find their voices." I'm sure Feinberg doesn't mean it this way as much of her writing is warm and heartfelt, but she needs to grasp just what a slap in the face this is to women in the church a generation or two ahead of her. Does she really believe that we CAN'T find women pastors, even women who can speak to mega-crowds, "overnight"? Does she not realize how many gifted women who have developed their gifts and found their voices over decades who are not only ready, but who are ALREADY leading tens or hundreds or thousands, who don't need to be "strong-armed"? Of course we should train up the children for leadership roles as they are gifted, but to ignore the vibrant women leaders ALREADY trained as pastors, preachers, teachers, lawyers, doctors, nurses, administrators ... is to demonstrate just how divorced from reality and impenetrable parts of the evangelical bubble really are. Of course, not everything should be about gender issues and we should always also value women gifted in other than leadership roles. But, as a middle-aged woman, I am saddened beyond belief to hear this "not yet" perspective, this "quiet but effective" paradigm, from yet another generation of young evangelical women.

Crooked Bird: I had the same experience you describe (being mentored as a young woman by men in the church, usually pastors). I never even thought of the reason given by your friend! I think there may be some truth in that which I will be pondering.

As someone rather disillusioned with most "women's" Bible studies, I am inspired to pursue Margaret Feinberg's work. Thanks for an intriguing interview.

As someone rather disillusioned with most "women's" Bible studies, I am inspired to pursue Margaret Feinberg's work. Thanks for an intriguing interview.

THE BEAUTY IN THE STAINED GLASS CEILING?! (excuse my yelling) Does this apply to her as well? She's great with having her use of her gift limited? I really wish I could ask her that. Maybe I'll google her website and send her an email...

THE BEAUTY IN THE STAINED GLASS CEILING?! (excuse my yelling) Does this apply to her as well? She's great with having her use of her gift limited? I really wish I could ask her that. Maybe I'll google her website and send her an email...

I agree with much of the above comments. In my interaction with Margaret on gender issues (we spoke side-by-side on a panel over women in the church several years ago) I'd have to say she hadn't (at that time) given gender issues enough thought or study. We all stereotype, personality (Type A, extrovert/introvert) still remains a major way people stereotype each other, often as much as gender. We don't want to judge a thing by its abuse. To say gender is used to stereotype so we don't want to understand or delve into it is as unhelpful as saying ethnicity is used to stereotype so we don't want to understand the differences. And there are differences, but that is why, I believe, God wanted a man and a woman to represent his image on earth. I believe Margaret is confusing because she's not completely clear. There is much to lose popularity-wise, if you do come down on this issue more clearly. I do wish she'd invite more women to speak alongside her, to share the spotlight. I think if she did more study, she'd have to come down firmer than she currently does on being more aware of gender distinctions if only in experience in American evangelical culture i.e. how difficult it is for women to speak in the places of power (pulpits, elder boards, etc). On the panel where we spoke together she encouraged women to admire "the beauty in the stained glass ceiling." I still disagree with her advice. Jonalyn Fincher www.RubySlippers.org