The Good and Bad Effects of Social Feminism

An (unfortunately) anonymous commenter states:

Wow, your understanding of feminism is juvenile at best. Your example above doesn’t have anything to do with feminism in the slightest. Let me help you with a more realistic example. Jill and Tommy both help clean the gutters on the roof. Jill does the front gutters and Tommy does the back gutters. After they are done, Dad gives Jill one dollar and Tommy five dollars.

Here is another example. Dad won’t let Jill clean the gutters on the roof. He tells Jill she can do the dishes instead. Unfortunately, doing the dishes is only worth 50 cents while cleaning the gutters is worth five dollars.

Now Jill and Tommy are in high school. Tommy wants to go out with the prettiest girl in school. Dad gives him the keys to the car, a few extra bucks, a wink and a nod and tells him to not stay out too late. Jill wants to go out with the hunky quarterback. Dad insists that he give the boy the once-over before she can date him, that she can only go out with him on a group date and that she be home by midnight.

As a Christian, my commitment is to Biblical standards. When society makes a movement towards Biblical truth, I applaud that. And there are some effects of the feminist movement that have certainly brought us closer to Biblical truth. I would certainly oppose a situation which represents (in terms of gender) any of the above scenarios.

But this is the problem with egalitarianism; it represents only part of the Biblical truth. Egalitarianism, therefore, is seductive because it builds upon something which is close to Biblical truth but then distorts that truth to further an agenda which the Bible opposes. According the Bible, mankind is made in the image of God. All men and women have been created equal by God. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), yet all who are justified are done so freely by the grace of God (Romans 3:24). Therefore, all who have been justified enjoy equal access to God, regardless of race, gender, etc. This the Bible makes clear.

So, Biblically speaking, we don’t have a situation where God gives one thing to one person but something else to someone else merely because of race or gender. The Apostle Paul wrote extensively to oppose such a concept, telling us that the cross of Christ eliminates the Jew/Gentile distinction in the people of God. Furthermore, grace is sovereign, elective grace, and the basis of election is unconditional. Both Jill and Tommy are sinners before God, deserving wrath and punishment. Neither can demand grace from God, yet God gives grace to both based upon no merit in them but upon his pleasure alone. Clearly, therefore, these scenarios that our anonymous commenter presents are merely strawmen, for none of them are ones which I would endorse.

But our anonymous commenter fails to address for us those components of egalitarianism which I oppose, which I consider to be unbiblical thinking. And that is the egalitarian agenda as applied to the church and to the family unit. To say that Jill is a mother and Tommy is a father, and that being a mother and being a father are two different roles is not something which somehow fails to reward one or the other for his or her deeds. The same is true in the church; the Bible makes clear that the roles of Pastor and Teacher are roles which are to be held by men alone (1 Tim 2). This is no more degrading to a woman than it is to the Son who, though equal with the Father, took on a role of functional subordination in the plan of redemption. The problem, however, is that (for wrong reasons), certain things get applauded. Being a Pastor gets more applause in the church than the person who holds the door open. On a Biblical basis, this should not be the case (Rom 12, 1 Cor 12). Biblically speaking, greatness is measured in humble service, and unseen, unapplauded service is the greatest of them all, the service which will receive the most applause in heaven. But the problem is that everyone wants to be applauded, here, now, on this earth. So now what? Everyone wants to be a pastor, and to say that the Bible does not allow for women to have the role of pastor is to somehow undermine equality. Does it undermine equality to say that men cannot be moms? Does it undermine equality to say that a man is simply not biological fit to embrace the role of a “mother”? Does it undermine equality to recognize that God has gifted his church of people, all equal before him on the basis of grace alone, with different gifts and different roles?

Radical egalitarianism opposes any differences. In effect, no one can be governed because no one can submit to government. But the Bible, while upholding our equality, recognizes the differences which God ordains for certain people. The members of the body of Christ are different from one another. The Bible sets the metaphor of a body with many parts in 1 Corinthians 12. The role of government God has given to some, not all (Rom 13). God created men and women equally, but differently, not identically (Gen 2). In fact, it is simply the case that God distributes gifts unequally: “Who made man’s mouth? Who makes him deaf or mute? Who gives him sight or makes him blind? Is it not I the LORD?” (Exodus 4:11). We cannot object to this because no one deserves to receive any gifts at all. No one deserves to be living. Grace cannot be demanded.

Our anonymous commenter continues:

You see, all of my examples highlight real world problems addressed by feminism.

Then it’s great that God, in his grace, has brought goodness from a movement which has sought to distort Biblical truth.

Your example provides nothing other than pointing out the obvious that two kids will fight over a perceived injustice where none really exists.

The objection to the concept that God has given different roles to different genders is merely a perceived injustice, not an actual one. Your scenarios did not represent my objections to egalitarianism. They merely represented strawmen statements which I would oppose. If the feminist movement has corrected such injustice, then glory be to God for his providence.

Oh, wait a minute, now I get it. You don’t think that unequal pay for equal work is an injustice.

1. What work has man done that he deserves any gifting from God? Can grace be demanded?

2. How is the complementarian view of Biblical manhood and womanhood result in “unequal pay.” Sure, your scenarios you posited result in unequal pay, but I reject your scenarios.

You don’t think that everyone should be given an equal opportunity to compete for meaningful employment.

Perhaps I was unclear in my original article. But I do believe men and women should have equal opportunities to compete for meaningful employment. Again, these are the good effects of social feminism.

The bad effects, however, are when the role of Father is no different than the role of Mother, or when the church begins to adopt the mentality that unless women are pastors and teachers, they are somehow unequal.

And I guess it goes without saying that you don’t think a woman can be allowed to control her own sexuality. Silly me, it is so obvious now. That’s why you’re not a feminist.

Huh? What does this have to do with anything?

Evan May.