Jesus IS different: a feminist's take on Jesus and gender roles

Oil is to water as feminist is to church.

Or so many people assume, especially in the South.

That, however, is not true - at least in my case - because of JESUS.

Yes, churches may have a problem or at least a discomfort with feminists but, I don't think Jesus would have. Jesus was different. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if Jesus even identified as a feminist.

In a society where "a woman's social position was on the same level as that of children and slaves... [where] a woman's fortune was entirely tied to that of her husband [where] Boys went to school - girls didn't - which only perpetuated a system that limited women to hearth and home" (p 178), Jesus was different.  Back in Biblical times, Jesus approached women, spoke with them, taught them, traveled with them, loved and respected them.

"When women called [Jesus] 'Savior,' they may have been speaking of the temporal as well as the spiritual world" (p 175).

"Of course, each woman would have an individual response to Jesus, but judging from what we know of their surroundings, many women certainly had a positive one. Scattered throughout the Gospels are stories similar to that of the jug-bearing Samaritan woman [the woman at the well, John 4:4-42], where the female object of Jesus's attention is at first incredulous, then surprised, then excited to be addressed as an equal by such a compassionate and obviously learned man. Invariably, the stories end with the woman returning to her place of origin to share the message with her counterparts - as with the healing of Jarius's daughter in Matthew 9:18-26, when 'the report of this spread throughout the district.' In that healing as in so many others involving women, Jesus intentionally highlighted their plight" (p 174).

Jesus was different. 


"Besides the obvious benefits of physical healing, how much of the good news that the women seemed so anxious to share centered on their acceptance as disciples on a par with Jesus's male followers?... Maybe Jesus's women are, instead, reacting positively to a spiritual leader who is talking to them face-to-face and giving them access to knowledge that up to then they had not possessed" (p 175).

Jesus was different. 


"Here was a man who was preaching and teaching and living a life of equality in a world sharply defined by gender roles. Here was a man who insisted on conversation with people whom society had rendered invisible - the women, the sick, the poor. How much more powerful was his message when he spoke to a poor, sick woman?" (p 176).

Jesus was very different. 


"But Mosaic law [as in, the law of Moses... i.e. the 10 Commandments and such] contained some fairly restrictive rules in regard to women, in particular in regard to their menstruation. If the original law was devoted more to cleanliness and health - as were dietary laws - than to the cultural restriction of women, there is some thought that this law was reinforced by bodies of writing such the Mishnah, the first recording of the Oral Torah, in part to quell the growing equality fostered by early Christianity [my emphasis added]. In other words, the older law was in place in no small part to help ensure the physical safety of the Jews. As early Christianity and its message of oneness between the genders gained a toehold and then a foothold in ancient Mediterranean society, subsequent Jewish writings came down harder on restricting the movement and lives of females, which was hardly the laws' original intent" (p 178-79).

Hopefully you have caught on by now but, I shall say it again: Jesus was different. He did not get hung up on those older, tedious laws. He also did not repress women with their lineage - to Eve or otherwise.

"Never once is it recorded that Jesus reminded a woman - as Jewish law did - that she was the daughter of Eve, nor did he hint that women were responsible for any sin other than their own. It simply was not an issue for him, and that must have been a freeing thing for women of that time to hear" (p181).

The wonderful thing is that it STILL is a freeing thing for women of THIS time to hear.


Jesus IS different. 


Yes, some churches may cherry pick certain verses to maintain society's gender roles but, clearly, Jesus did not see a need for that separation: "There is no longer Jew nor Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus" - Galatians 3:28

Nonetheless, "writer after writer uses the Bible as the key tool against women's emancipation. With no thought to context, certain members of today's churches repeat the (misinterpreted) canard that women are to keep silent in the assembly, and that women are not to usurp authority over a man. Those same elect point to commonly held historical interpretations of the sacred text that wrongly insist there were no female apostles or early church leaders [um, hello, not only Mary Magdalene, Mary, Martha, but also Phoebe, Nympha, etc.] The role of women has been deleted or greatly discounted in subsequent retellings of the biblical stories... and far too much trust placed in the hands of unseen and unknown authors from long ago [likely influenced by that gender-role-requiring society]. The same rigorous scrutiny one would bring to, say, a new insurance policy is not practiced in regard to the Bible.

"Only by looking at the data as a whole can we come to understand Jesus and his honest and historical approach to gender. And then perhaps we, too, can respond as Martha did, with a resounding and matter-of-fact confession that Jesus is Christ, and his message applies equally to all of us" (p 183).

Thank God that Jesus was and IS different from society in how he treats women. 

"Yes, Lord," she told him, "I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who has come into the world."

                                                 - Martha, John 11:27


NOTE:

Excerpts in this blog were taken from Chapter 10: Water Jugs in the book Dating Jesus: a story of Fundamentalism, Feminism, and the American Girl by Susan Campbell. The author, pushed away from Christianity by a rigorous and extreme Fundamentalist upbringing, is no longer a regular church attendee, but she is still "dating Jesus." This was a childhood notion she had that has stuck with her well into adulthood and the inspiration for her book. She clearly knows her stuff and was full of facts and references as well as humor if you'd like to read the book.

Also, the somewhat odd title of her chapter (Water Jugs) is a reference to women: "Throughout history, says feminist theologian Elisabeth Moltman-Wendel, water jugs have been a symbol associated with women. Women of significance in the Bible are often portrayed either holding a water jug or container or in close proximity to one. Abraham straps a water container onto Hagar's shoulder before he sends her wandering with her son in Genesis 21:14. Rebekah lets Abraham's servant drink from her jar in Genesis 24, and opens up a whole can of worms with Isaac. You get the idea. You see a woman, and a water container is most likely somewhere nearby" (p 170-71).

All My Single Ladies

June - aka the wedding month.

While I am truly overjoyed for my friends who have met their Mr. Right and gotten married recently, if I see one more facebook photo album of a wedding, I may scream. Or cry.

Admittedly, I do view every photo of every album  - to stow away ideas for my future wedding, of course (as though this is a really urgent task!?!) -  but it is painful at times. I think it is safe to say that being single sucks in the month of June.

But, not so, according to the authors of a new book: Last One Down the Aisle Wins - 10 keys to a fabulous single life now & an even better marriage later. 

They argue that women should get to know themselves, gain independence, control their own finances, follow their passions, work on their education and careers, travel, etc. before marrying. In fact, they think women should wait until they are out of their 20s before marrying.

To be honest, I haven't read the book yet, only the article found at the link above but it seems a bit extreme; I'm thinking there is a happy medium, maybe 3 or 4 years after graduating rather than right after college or waiting until your 30.

It all depends, however, on when you meet "the one." Whether you wait a day or a decade, it is worth the wait and you shouldn't settle. I LOVE the way they explained that:

"What about this idea of "settling" for a Mr. Right Now — should young women still hold out for "the one"?

What a depressing message to send young women: You'll never find “the one”, so you should just settle for the best one who'll agree to marry you. Horrid! We not only urge women to hold out for Mr. Right, we also encourage them not to settle for themselves in their twenties. When a woman spends her single years becoming the best version of herself, what she's looking for in in a guy/husband/father to her children will inevitably evolve. She'll naturally begin to value character over charisma, connection over charm. This evolution will lead her to be attracted to a man with whom she can build a great life ... voila ... Mr. Right! But she simply won't be able to spot him until she's Mrs. Right. And that takes time."

So, all my single ladies, I hope you read the article and might even read the book. Either way, be encouraged because as the article points out, people who delay their marriage until after the age of 25 cut the chance of divorce in half. 

In other words, single may suck now - particularly during the wedding month - but it can pay off in the end. 

In the meantime, here are a few of my favorite songs for a soundtrack to singleness... 

If you're feeling old-school and desperate: Queen's Somebody to Love

If you're feeling alone and impatient: John Mayer's Love Song For No One

If you're feeling optimistic and hopeful: Michael Buble's Haven't Met You Yet

And, finally, a nod to the title of this post, if you're feeling defiant in your singleness: Beyonce's Single Ladies

Correcting Our Language Round 2: Hey Guys

"Hey guys."

People say that all the time. No big deal, right? I'm not so sure.

You might think it's nit-picky to question it but I ask you to turn the tables...

If a female went up to a group of 4 or 5 men and said "Hey girls," I feel certain eyebrows would raise and perhaps a few tempers too :) If not insulting, it is certainly incorrect.

So why don't eyebrows or tempers raise when a male goes up to a group of 4 or 5 women and says "Hey guys"? Again, if not insulting, it certainly is incorrect.

To further ponder this point, think about a category outside of gender. Let's say religion.

A Christian could not go up to a group of 4 or 5 Muslims and say "Hey Christians." That surely would raise eyebrows and tempers.

What about race? Profession? Sexual orientation? Etc, etc, etc.

I admit, I tend to over-analyze things but, fortunately, this is an easy thing to fix. Obviously, to be on the safe side, you could just say "Hey girls" or "Hey ladies."

However, as a Southerner, I suggest my personal favorite - the most inclusive (gender or otherwise) greeting  there is - "Hey y'all" ;)

Spoleto Festival and Gender

Long time, no talk. My apologies.

I have been super busy, blessed with the opportunity to be a Media Relations apprentice for the 2010 Spoleto Festival USA in Charleston, SC. I worked in the Press Room and was able to see over 20 shows!?!

Unfortunately: work + festival going = no time to blog :(

Fortunately: festival going + a feminist audience member (ahem...me) = the following interesting observations on gender :)

1) Flora, an Opera .... Southern Belle Feminist impression: Flora, a Feminist

• This opera was the first-ever performed in American - 275 years ago in 1735!?! But it is surprisingly modern with its female lead :)
• She is damsel-in-distress-y stuck in a castle by her evil uncle (Sir Testy... funny, right?) BUT she plans to escape with her lover (Mr. Friendly... another clever name).
• However, once she is outside the castle walls, Flora doesn't just run off to la-la land but questions Mr. Friendly with "what ifs" for their future. I say good for her, using her heart AND her head.
• Visually and vocally beautiful! Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=fnbPhLHBFxc&feature=related

2) This is What Happens Next.... SBF impression: Gender Identity Crisis

• This one man show still managed to have multiple characters.Phenomenal lighting and sound made a clear distinction as Daniel MacIvor morphed into the role of each new character complete with different names, voices and mannerisms. 
• From a gender perspective, the most interesting "character" was his aunt/uncle Aaron/Erin. He literally talked about the name change and referenced physical changes as well. Furthermore, he briefly touched on the mental aspects of the gender identity crisis with what to wear, who to date, etc. 
• Definitely thought provoking! Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FzXiidFBP8

3) Les Ballets Trockadero de Monte Carlo... SBF impression: Ballet in Drag

• If you saw the photo on that link, all those ballerinas are men. Despite the fantastic make-up (that they apply themselves) and convincing wigs, look for the hairy chests ;) 
• These men play the male and female roles in point ballet shoes (one guy was almost 7 feet tall with them on) as well as wearing tights, and of course tutus. 
• Because they truly dance the parts, precise in all the techniques and moves, this is quite amazing that they are able to move their much larger bodies in the same way that dainty, thin prima (aka female) ballerinas do. 
• And it was soooo funny; almost like the Monty Python of ballet.
• Wonderful, original show! Check them out: http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=IYLpzXO40Zk&feature=related AND http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=gyqQ-VNnEIQ&feature=related

4) I Can See Myself in Your Pupil... SBF impression: Gender Bending

• This dance group was amazing and soooo strong in their moves but also in their lifts; men did the traditional lifting of women but men also lifted men and women lifted women. Even more impressive though, women lifted men!
• These pairs were also repeated for dancing and dragging portions of the show where couples definitely paired off: man + woman, man + man, and woman + woman
• A final thing that I quite possibly just read into too much was a dance where one woman seemed to be fighting off one of the male dancer's sexual advances. He would grab her and she would pull away or push him off, etc. In general, the show displayed defiant and strong women. 
• Plus, the whole show was just really cool with fun music, colorful costumes, and creative dancing (e.g. at one point, they danced with their shadows!?!) Check them out: http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=ewKtJOMGqGg&feature=related AND look for their shadows on the back wall in this one, especially around the 2-3 minute mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01i1ix310Ko&NR=1

5) Lucinda Childs' Dance....SBF impression: Androgynous

• This show was revived from 1979 when Lucinda Childs was the female lead and other than new, younger dancers, the music, moves, costumes, shoes, etc. were recreated as closely to the originals as possible. 
• The really captivating part was the current show is performed in front of video of the original 1979 performance and the two intertwine seamlessly.
• What was strange though was you couldn't really tell the men from the women. All were dressed in white pants and shirts and were so thin that breasts or biceps were hardly large enough to clearly designate one dancer male or one dancer female. 
• Overall though, the effect was mesmerizing. Check them out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8Z3yRkvzyM

These shows and all the others made for a fantastic festival. I hope you were able to see some of the shows or at least enjoyed a taste of them here :)