John Piper and Patriarchal Christianity

John Piper's blog has a piece about women's roles and it's really problematic.

What I find infuriating about John Piper and his ministry (and its popularity among evangelicals) is that they refuse discourse. They consider the Bible to be immutable, but only immutable in their interpretation of it. REALLY, how difficult is it for husbands to "accept" their leadership roles? How difficult is it for men to accept the will of God by accepting their assurance of power in the church?

How insulting to couples who find their own way, making things work with each other. Like there is only one way that couples can "make music."

My husband and I have "inverse" roles in many ways. We work out systems around what is most effective, and what helps us love each other more. We make decisions together. We sacrifice for each other. The idea that I need to submit to him in a first century manner is astonishingly closed-minded. And what about my friends who are in same sex relationships and don't define themselves husband or wife? We aren't allowed to be complementary or harmonizing? Not according to Parnell's (Piper's) point of view--it's "un-biblical," thus un-glorifying to God.

He quotes a "pretend" conversation he had with a woman he heard at a conference. This is how he describes her: "The topic was content strategy on the Web, and the woman doing the talking was a respected author and guru in this particular field. She had brilliant insights on online trends and offered memorable one-liners, and somehow managed to bring up “sexism” at least four times. Her topic had little, if anything, to do with gender, but it became clear that she had been the victim of mistreatment in the past. Her references to gender equality became so prevalent, in fact, that in certain asides it could have passed as a women’s empowerment rally." 

My husband and I read this together and he articulated what I wanted to say so well: "Jonathon Parnell [i.e. also Piper] is a misogynist and an idiot. Parnell is obviously unaware that gender is no longer even popularly (never mind scientifically and theoretically) considered to be binary. For example, we have men with vaginas and women with penises. And it's not shocking. However, I bet he'd be shocked. Parnell wouldn't know queer if it was sitting in front of him. And like so many Christian men, he believes that transgressing traditional roles is a sign of abuse. What is actually shocking is that he jokes about sexual abuse and uses the joke to imply that the real woman he has an imaginary conversation with has been abused. So her problem is patriarchal violence and his solution is more patriarchy."

Right on.

He wants to defend his patriarchal views, against women who stand strongly opposed to sexism specifically in their industry. So he paints them as victims: they're lashing out against men because they're hurt. They sound like feminists but really, it's only because they've been wronged by a bad man out there. Anyway, they shouldn't talk about this at a web content strategy conference--take it to a women's empowerment rally!

Interesting to note that in this imaginary conversation, Jonathon Parnell, the author of this piece, can title himself "JP," yet titles the woman from Silicon Valley "SV." He speaks from his personal point of view. She has no name. A symbolic objectification.

"Strong" Women

When I read Kareem Abdul Jabbar's "The 'Strong Woman' Myth", I actually hooted and hollered. I love it when someone articulates what I've known all along. In this article, he discusses the use of "positive" modifiers for people groups in mass media, like saying "proud African Americans" or "strong women." He posits that the modifiers are insulting and detrimental to their communities because they also imply the opposite while being employed, or they take on a derogatory meaning all on its own. For example, "proud" can imply that there are many who aren't, and it has taken on the meaning of "uppity" or "arrogant." Even the word "white" in "white trash" implies that trash usually isn't white. "Strong" is used because women are typically considered "weak," and implies there are still many who are weak.

In my early twenties, I encountered a group of Asian American Christian men in my church, mostly Korean American, who took it upon themselves to label me, and several of my friends, "strong girls." They didn't even use the word "women." They meant it as a joke, to refer to the women in their church who aren't afraid to voice their opinions and debate with men. "Strong girls" didn't act like cooking and cleaning were their first priorities. Strong girls didn't act or look meek...humble. They laughed loudly, they interpreted the Bible in a thought provoking manner, and their intelligence stretched into the secular world. Sometimes they were even funnier than the boys. God fucking forbid.

Once, a guy came up to me to ask if I knew how to iron. I said, "Yeah, who doesn't." He went back to his group of gawking boys and they all exploded in giggles. Later, I found out there was a bet to see if I took on domestic tasks, being a strong girl and all.

It got spiritual too, of course. Suddenly, when the conservative woman in charge of teaching church leaders started saying that the women don't know their place in today's church, how women have improperly stopped wearing pantyhose, how women don't know how to serve anymore, how certain women were unteachable and proud, I felt invisible fingers starting to point at me. And although I couldn't change how I felt, my behavior started to change a bit, just to keep the invisible fingers at bay. I may have laughed more softly. I may have tried a new recipe for a small group Bible study dinner. I may have tried to look like I was praying harder and keeping my mouth shut.

(At this point, I'd like to take a moment to give a shout out to the guys who were friends, who never made me feel unattractive or too strong, the guys who respected me and cared for me. I won't forget you when I'm rich and famous.)

It all hurt my feelings at the time. I was young, and feeling very excited about my new found spirituality. I felt naive and manipulated by...the overall culture of the church? The church leaders? The boys who called me "strong"?

In my thirties, I'm married to a man who is smart and accomplished. It makes me incredibly competitive at times, and he has to remind me how much he respects me to get me to stop. It's crazy! I love him, respect him, am jealous of him, debate with him, tell him he's wrong, apologize to him, cry on his shoulder, let him cry on mine, and never in our marriage has he made me feel like those boys above. He doesn't call me "strong" as an insult because A) he's not a chauvinist, and B) he's secure in his identity and ability.

It took being married to a man like mine to realize those boys never had confidence. They wanted to be respected because of their positions in the church hierarchy of power, not because they deserve respect. And they wanted girls who were quiet and meek, the quintessential Christian wife who didn't care too much about their intellect, their appearance, or their voice, but still had to be thin, hot, and really good at everything behind the scenes. The kind of girl who will respect them simply because Ephesians says to respect the head of the family, whether they've earned it or not. Like this mystery woman exists. This ridiculous desire of theirs causes women to change their personalities, to downplay their talents, to silence their voices.

The reason I write this now is because I know there are still men like this in the church, making women feel too strong if they ever call a church skit sexist, or state that they're feminists, or simply disagree with a male church leader. The church will excuse their behavior because they are men and because they hold positions in the church, but the church will not validate the feelings of the women they affect. I certainly hope I'm wrong. I hope girls that choose to go to church today can freely be themselves. But I have a feeling that as long as churches hold on to the archaic notion that women don't belong in leadership, men will continue to accuse women of being "too strong."