I love that there are many discussions, books, speakers, etc. that are engaging the question of what it means to be a man. I see that men are in a state of confusion and need to be affirmed in the masculinity God created them with. I can see just in my own family what a skewed vision of manhood we have based on the personality of my dad, and how it created so much conflict in my brother. I can see how us women really haven't helped the situation much with our lack of understanding. Manhood needs to be addressed.
But in response to the manhood discussion, there have been a few books about being a woman and femininity. I kind of hate being the sex that is the afterthought. It almost seems that in the Creation account in Genesis woman was an afterthought to God too. Woman was created in response to man's loneliness. Woman was created from man's flesh, in the image of the man who was already created in the image of God. In the new testament it says that man is the glory of God, and woman is the glory of man. hmmph.
I think that men in this culture treat women as an afterthought too. They set forth in their puposes and, if they are enlightened to the value of woman, they find a way to fit their woman into their purposes. If they are not enlightened to woman's value, they just expect women to continue to be their props - someone to feed them and birth their legacies. Uhg. I hate sounding like a freakish feminist. I really am not angry (at least not as I type this!). But are these thoughts that I have the courage to type, but not speak, really that off-base? I guess I am just confused...still...as to what my place is as a woman, and a follower of Christ, in this culture.
And that is where I get frustrated with the manhood debates, as needed as they are, because woman is not being addressed or given voice. Instead woman is expected to stand and rally around the men at their own expense. And I don't think this is menacing...I think it is, as most things are in the church culture, completely unbalanced. Even if woman was created after man, God gave mankind (man and woman) a singular command - to subdue, rule, fill and multiply the earth. God gave the first woman and man the same rule within the garden - to remember that he is God and they are not. So how can we confront and converse about the redefining of gender without minimizing the other, and the Other?
If I believe that God is perfect, then I can't believe that woman was an afterthought. So now I am confronted with the fact that either a) my understanding of God is wrong, which leaves God being wrong and out of control, and therefore woman is indeed a divine afterthought or b) my understanding of God's ways are wrong, which means God is in control and there is something about the way he created man and woman that I don't yet understand.
Even if there is some chance that God isn't perfect, he is still bigger than me, so I tend to avoid picking fights with him. So I accept b) - that I am not God.
Now where do I go from here?
3 comments:
Hi there Caz! You are asking the same questions that I am it seems.
Here is something that ocurred to me in the past few days as I have pondered on these same questions.
Woman was not an afterthought - she just was second. I believe God made man and noted to Himself...hmm, its not good for him to be alone. Not - he's lonely, let me fix that. Simply, it won't be good for him to be alone, void of intimacy. If God created humankind as a sort of form of intimacy with Him and humankind is created in His image, it stands to reason we'd need/desire/should experience that intimacy as well.
As far as woman being a helpmate, I think that is about teamwork. If I am on a team, I need my team mates or helpmates help. We work together. I ntoiced tonight it was not until after the disobedience that God uttered the words 'and he shall rule over you' Perhaps the preffered way or perfect expression of peace which was the state prior to the fall had more to do with equal footing as a team, to do those things you mentioned - rule, subdue, etc.
Still leaves us with working our way back to His kingdom here on earth....but does shed a different perspective on things than what I was 'taught' or perhaps what was inferred to me.
What do you think?
Thanks doxallo for the insights. I don't know why it surprises me that this is a struggle, as life as a whole is struggling through sin and redemption! But, I just wish these issues of gender were something we could settle within the church.
Another question I often struggle with is...should our goal be to live as if we are in Eden? Is that the ideal way of living in community with others?
Caz, thats a great question.
I began reading something recently that talks about the 'sin issue' from the standpoint of 'shalom' and in essence, the garden of eden before the disobedience being shalom - peace.
I am sort of supposing that is what "thy kingdom come, thys will be done ON EARTH as it is in heaven" might mean. (?) A peace, not in our terms, but in terms of what it meant originally.
I dunno.
Is it really God's WILL that 'he shall rule over you' or was that only in response to the woman's disobedience? Is it because our intent is always to be 'in control' and so now the 'better' thing is for a man to rule over us?
I only end up with more questions for now. :)
A gal friend of mine just posted two pieces of writing regarding women/roles/Eve over on a forum I participate in, I haven't had time to read them yet, but she touches on this issue - of Eve wanting control and man ruling over, etc. I do not know if i will agree with her positions, but it may help me think more and provide me with some further thoughts. I'll share after I read them.
I must admit, I am only BEGINNING to scratch the surface of this topic for myself, so I may go around in a circle before I get to what I believe is 'right'. Part of the process, the journey I suppose.
Janice
Post a Comment