Emerging Women

This story from the Czech Republic was recently brought to my attention –

Fresh from their success in parliamentary elections, a group of female politicians have posed for a calendar to highlight the growing presence of women in Czech politics. Members of the Public Affairs party will feature in a 2011 charity calendar posing provocatively in revealing outfits. The party’s racy calendar comes after a record 44 women were voted into the 200-seat lower house of the Czech parliament.

Predictably the response to this is mixed. Some are praising the women for being empowered – in their bodies and in their careers. It is classic third wave feminism, women taking control of their sexuality and using it to their advantage to show that they are in control of their own lives. Others though are mocking these women, saying that they are demeaning themselves, setting the women’s movement back thirty years, and playing into the idea that women are only useful as sex objects.

I’d be interested to hear how the readers here respond to something like this. But beyond that I’d like to hear your thoughts on women’s sexuality. Does a woman being sexy imply that she is an object for men to consume or can it be an expression of her reclaiming ownership of her body and being comfortable in her own skin? For Christians, is there any place for a woman to look good or sexy, or is that automatically condemned as sinful or tempting? What options are there for Christian women to affirm her body without sending the wrong message?

I love to hear how the readers here navigate these issues in a world where there are obviously drastically different points of view.

By Julie Clawson

Jim Henderson of Off the Map is working on a book on how the church treats women. As part of his research he commissioned the Barna Group to conduct a survey of women’s experiences in the church. They (Barna Group) spoke with 603 women who met the following qualifications: 18 years or older, described themselves as “Christian” And had attended a Christian church service at least once during the past six months. Among those women, 63% met the survey criteria for being a “Born Again Christian.”

Here’s a bit of what the survey discovered –

1. 84% say that their church’s perspective on women in ministry is almost identical, very similar, or somewhat similar to their own.
2. 83% say that their Senior Pastor is somewhat, highly or completely supportive of women leading in their church
3. 82% say they can tell by their church’s actions that the church values the leadership of women
4. 81% say that their church provides women with the same degree of leadership opportunities as Jesus would.
5. 72% say they possess a lot of spiritual freedom in their life
6. 70% say that the media has little influence on their decision-making
7. 71% say fear is not something they experience ever or often in their life
8. 62% say that ALL leadership roles are open to them in their church.
9. Only 1% say they often struggle with jealousy
10. Among those who feel they are capable of doing more to serve God, and should be doing more, only 4% say that their fear of failure is holding them back from doing more to serve God.

Jim admits that these results seem almost unnaturally positive and asked for other women to comment if these results actually represent their own experience. Here’s what a few Emerging Women wrote on their own blogs concerning the results -

Pam Hogeweide responded -

When I first saw these stats, I had to reread them three times just to make sure I was understanding the data. It then became apparent to me: if a woman in church believes she is only meant to serve and lead other women or children, then yes, of course she is content within her church experience. If today’s Christian woman is convinced by the men in power who teach her that she is to remain dutifully in her biblically mandated role, then this is the perception she will report from.

To answer Jim’s question for myself, No, these stats do not match my experience, nor the experience of many, many women on the road of faith I have known for the last 28 years.

Kathy Escobar commented as well –

once i look up and out at the reality of women in the typical evangelical-y church system i get really, really sad. and really, really mad. when i read these statistics i honestly thought it was a joke. they are not representative of the majority of women that i know and their experiences. but then i remembered that most of the women i hang out with on a regular basis are, on the whole, no longer drinking the christian company kool-aid.
what do i mean by the company kool-aid?

i mean the things that the system tell us to believe. the things that leaders engrain into the community’s culture. the things that are backed up with “we’re 100% certain this is what God meant.” the subtle and direct messages that “good christians believe this.” the herd mentality that is so strong in any homogenous culture–this is the direction everyone’s going so i better tow the line and walk this way, talk this way, too.

And Sonja writes –

It made me angry to read these statistics. It made me angry, not just for the women … but for all the people involved in those churches. They are losing out. This is not the Kingdom of Heaven that Jesus talked about in the Sermon on the Mount, or as he walked with his disciples or at any time. Would even Peter, or John the beloved disciple be able to answer these questions so affirmatively? How about Mary Magdalene? Good grief, if even the disciples struggled with jealousy why on earth can only 6 women out 603 acknowledge it? Perhaps it was the word, often, that threw them off. Maybe they decided that they could deny that jealousy was something that strolled in and regularly did battle in their hearts. I know I will stand up and say that I am jealous all the time. It doesn’t make me mean anymore, but acknowledging it to myself and being able to laugh at it has made it easier.

Then this report made me sad. The kind of sad that aches in my bones. Because when I look at it I see poverty. The church in North America (like the US) may have a lot of money. It may have a lot of stuff. We may also have a lot of people for all I know. But we are starving to death. Emaciated and dying for lack of food, water and oxygen. Worse, we are doing it to ourselves. With a huge smile on our faces. We are a people with anorexia or bulimia. When we look in the mirror we see fat and happy, but the reality is we are starving. Dying.

In all truth I lost my faith in the Barna Group’s ability to conduct meaningful surveys years ago. The way they ask their questions, and especially who they ask them of, doesn’t exactly represent reality as I know it. But I get that for women in churches that tell them that “1. Women must not lead in the church, 2. To question that is to question the Bible, and 3. That to question the Bible (or admit there might be different interpretations) is a slippery-slope into unchristian liberalism” OF COURSE they are going to say that they are in agreement with their church’s confining views of women. I bought that lie hook, line, and sinker for years, I know that world.

So like the other women have expressed, these survey results sadden me. They do represent a segment of the church – one where patriarchy rules disguised in biblical clothing. These women don’t have the freedom to question their position without fear of being mocked or excluded from their fellowship. They don’t even have the freedom to admit they experience fear or jealousy (what sort of sick repression is going on here in our image first church world????) They don’t believe that they are allowed to be happy in any other setting. I get that that part of the church exists. But it’s not my experience anymore. Maybe the women who have escaped that world might not fall into Barna’s strict definition of Christian (didn’t a few years ago they define a Christian as one who believes in the Bible’s inerrancy?) I don’t know, I just know that some of these results are disturbing on a deep and visceral level. There is much we can learn from the results, and I am eager to read Jim’s response in his book. But I also think there is a real danger of these statistics being grievously misused in defense of the continued oppression of women and the silencing of half the church. I pray that is not the case.

More people die from polluted water every year than from all forms of violence, including war, the United Nations said in a report yesterday that highlights the need for clean drinking water.

The report, launched to coincide with World Water Day, said an estimated two billion tons of waste water – including fertilizer run-off, sewage, and industrial waste – was being discharged daily. That waste fuels the spread of disease and damages ecosystems.

The report said 3.7 percent of all deaths were attributed to water-related diseases, translating into millions of deaths. More than half of the world’s hospital beds are filled by people suffering from water-related illnesses.

Clean water is essential for life, but one in eight of the world’s population does not have access to it. This, and lack of safe sanitation, result in 1.4 million children dying from water-related diseases every year.

The lack of clean water means millions of women and children spend hours each day searching for water and carrying it home. This exhausting task can cause damage to their heads, necks and spines, and leaves them with little time for productive work or education.

What We Can Do –

• Participate in the UNICEF Tap Project -
  In 2007, the UNICEF Tap Project was born in New York City based on a simple concept: restaurants would ask their patrons to donate $1 or more for the tap water they usually enjoy for free, and all funds raised would support UNICEF’s efforts to bring clean and accessible water to millions of children around the world.

  Growing from just 300 New York City restaurants in 2007 to thousands across the country today, the UNICEF Tap Project has quickly become a powerful national movement.

  During World Water Week, March 21-27, 2010, the UNICEF Tap Project will once again raise awareness of the world water crisis and vital funds to help the millions of children it impacts daily. All funds raised support UNICEF’s water, sanitation and hygiene programs, and the effort to bring clean and accessible water to millions of children around the world.

• Donate your status for World Water Week
  To help raise awareness, when you donate your status, they’ll tweet on Twitter and/or update your Facebook status every day during World Water Week—Monday, March 22 through Friday, March 26. You have the option to opt-out at any time.

  If you choose, they’ll also add a blue tint to your Twitter avatar. On Facebook, we’ll upload a new photo so you can make it your profile pic. At the end of the week, you can change these back or leave them up to show your support for clean water.

  Each day the posts will feature either: a water crisis fact, a story about people who have received access to clean water, events to celebrate, or a call for action. All updates have a link back to oneweekforwater.org to help spread the word.

  This site is about celebrating the progress that’s been made in the global water crisis—and calling for continued action. Over the past 10 years, 200 million people gained access to clean water, but 890 million people still need it—and more than 2.5 billion people lack access to safe sanitation.

• Support a Water Ministry
  • Living Water International – Living Water International exists to demonstrate the love of God by helping communities acquire desperately needed clean water, and to experience “living water”—the gospel of Jesus Christ—which alone satisfies the deepest thirst.
  • Charity: Water – a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe drinking water to people in developing nations. 100% of public donations directly fund water projects.
  • 100 Wells Campaign – 100,000 people in Jaac, Sudan need clean water to survive. The devastating genocide in Darfur has forced refugees to resettle in rural desert areas like Jaac—desert areas where clean water simply doesn’t exist. Our goal is to build 100 wells to serve this community.
  • blood:water mission – a grassroots organization that empowers communities to work together against the HIV/AIDS and water crisis.

By Julie Clawson

Clay Shirky’s recent blog post A Rant About Women has been getting it’s fair share of attention – mostly of the angry and upset variety. In the rant, he asserts that women don’t have the high-paying jobs and positions of power that men do basically because we don’t sell ourselves well enough. He sees male students all the time pompously asserting themselves and even lying in order to get where they want in life. Women just don’t act like arrogant bastards, and so therefore we are still underrepresented in the professional world. He suggests, we need to just be more like men in our self-promotion. He writes-

And it looks to me like women in general, and the women whose educations I am responsible for in particular, are often lousy at those kinds of behaviors, even when the situation calls for it. They aren’t just bad at behaving like arrogant self-aggrandizing jerks. They are bad at behaving like self-promoting narcissists, anti-social obsessives, or pompous blowhards, even a little bit, even temporarily, even when it would be in their best interests to do so. Whatever bad things you can say about those behaviors, you can’t say they are underrepresented among people who have changed the world.

Now this is asking women to behave more like men, but so what? We ask people to cross gender lines all the time. We’re in the middle of a generations-long project to encourage men to be better listeners and more sensitive partners, to take more account of others’ feelings and to let out our own feelings more. Similarly, I see colleges spending time and effort teaching women strategies for self-defense, including direct physical aggression. I sometimes wonder what would happen, though, if my college spent as much effort teaching women self-advancement as self-defense.

* * *

Some of the reason these strategies succeed is because we live in a world where women are discriminated against. However, even in an ideal future, self-promotion will be a skill that produces disproportionate rewards, and if skill at self-promotion remains disproportionately male, those rewards will as well. This isn’t because of oppression, it’s because of freedom.

So on one hand, I understand his point. Research has shown that often women make less than men simply because women don’t ask for raises as often as men do. We don’t put ourselves out there in risky ways, making ourselves look good no matter who it may hurt. But as a Christian I have a hard time with his suggestion that if women just became selfish jerks like men, we would be all good. Yes, we have the freedom to play that game and yes, it may actually get us more power and money, but we’d have to sell our soul in the process. I don’t want to play a bitchier meaner game in order to compete, I want to change the game itself. I would rather live in a world where being an arrogant bastard wasn’t a virtue. Sure, that might sound naive and idealistic, but it also sounds much more in line with my faith. If I want to be like Jesus, I can’t play the game “me first, screw whoever gets in my way.”

So I wonder if the professors and consultants who are putting their time and energy into helping women be able to play just as dirty as the men in a broken system would instead put effort into building a new system what difference that would make? What would it take for that to start to happen? What changes need to be made at fundamental levels to shift the way this entire game gets played? What would a system even look like where caring for the other instead of “every man for himself” was the central tenet?

Julie Clawson is a mother, writer, and speaker. She is the author of Everyday Justice: The Global Impact of Our Daily Choices (IVP, 2009). In addition to moderating the Emerging Women blog, she also writes at julieclawson.com.

By Sonja Andrews

I’m sitting in the rink on an early, early Saturday morning once again, having driven here with a quiet but not sullen pre-teen next to me. He was eating a bagel. The pouring rain and inky, black pre-dawn required most of my concentration, but in the quiet times I’ve had recently I’ve been thinking about anger. More specifically, how we treat anger and gender. I had a couple of instances recently that brought it to my attention, one is personal and the other happened to a friend.

First, the friend: Makeesha writes about her anger – “I have never felt this much anger – ever – and I don’t know what to do with it. I know anger is a secondary emotion and I can identify the primary emotions but I still feel angry and I still don’t know how to stop feeling angry.” Go read her whole post so you know what’s driving her anger … I’ve only copied the part that’s pertinent to what I’m writing about here.

I had a recent incident with LightGirl’s hockey team in which I had an inappropriate outburst at her new (male) teammates for treating her poorly. She has a couple of guys on the team who are making life miserable for a lot of kids, but they are using her gender to make life miserable for her and that is steaming me up. I lost my temper after a recent practice and … well … let’s just leave the details out of it, but the boys in question just laughed. And, to be fair, I bet I was pretty funny looking. We talked it through with her coach and it’s being worked out. But that’s not the point of all this.

I began to specifically think about women and anger. I don’t think women are supposed to be angry in our culture. We’re considered either funny or unacceptable in some way when we get angry. When men get angry, they are frightening and taken seriously. Women are … something else.

The other thing that I’ve been tossing around both in my mind and in conversation (with LightGirl) is the idea that we should “stop feeling” anger (as Mak puts it). That anger is an emotion to get rid of. What if it’s an emotion that is to signal that something is wrong (which it is) and it is to give us energy to change that wrong or walk through the wrong (if we can’t change it)? I wonder a lot about our culture’s desire to ameliorate negative emotions so that we don’t feel sadness or anger or pain for too long.

Which brings me to a quote I heard on a new drama on NBC called “Mercy.“ The main character is being convinced against her will to get marital and PTSD counseling by some friends. They are giving her all the standard advice about why she should talk about her feelings and her response? “I like my feelings all pushed down and compressed. That way they pop out at random and inappropriate moments.” This is not the way we should live, but it’s the way most of us do live despite all that we know about how to be emotionally healthy individuals or communities. No one likes to see a sad face or someone with angry eyebrows, so we put on masks for the outside world. Women in particular are very good at this … and we’re expected to be. We’re expected to smooth the waters for the family, for any given mixed gender group we are a part of, and when we do not the labels that are attached to us are not complimentary. To say the least.

So I have not come to any conclusions; I still have questions and wonderings about what role anger should play in our lives. Should we embrace it? Sit with it longer and see what it will tell us about ourselves and what we need to do? Without allowing it to control us (that is). Do you see things differently than I? Are women treated the same as men in anger? Or are they treated differently? What are your thoughts about all of this? I’d love to hear them …

This post first appeared at Sonja’s blog Calacirian.

By Adele Hebert

There are numerous occasions recorded in the Gospels where women are treated as second class citizens, even as sex objects, and it was expected that Jesus would do the same. One such occasion occurred when Jesus was invited to dinner at the house of a skeptical Pharisee (Lk 7:36ff.) and a woman of ill repute (harmatolos, a sinner) entered and washed Jesus’s feet with her tears, wiped them with her hair and anointed them. The Pharisee saw her solely as an evil sexual creature: “The Pharisee …said to himself, ‘If this man were a prophet, he would know who this woman is who is touching him and what a bad name she has.’” But Jesus deliberately rejected that way of thinking. He rebuked the Pharisee and spoke solely of the woman’s human, spiritual actions; he spoke of her love, her unlove, i.e., her sins, her being forgiven, and her faith. Jesus then addressed her (it was not “proper” to speak to women in public, especially “improper” women) as a human person: “Your sins are forgiven…. Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

A similar situation occurred when the scribes and Pharisees used a woman reduced entirely to a sex object to set a legal trap for Jesus (Jn 8:2 11). It is difficult to imagine a more callous use of a human person than what the “adulterous” woman was put through, by the enemies of Jesus. First, she was “taken” in the act, then dragged before the scribes and Pharisees, finally brought before an even larger crowd that Jesus was instructing, “making her stand in full view of everybody.” They told Jesus that she had been caught in the very act of committing adultery and that Moses had commanded that such women be stoned to death (Dt 22:22ff.). “What have you to say?” The trap was partly that if Jesus said Yes to the stoning he would be violating the Roman law, which limited capital punish¬ment, and if he said No, he would contravene Mosaic law. It could have been to expose Jesus’s reputation for kindness toward, and championing the cause of, women in opposition to the law and the condemnation of sin.

Jesus, of course, eluded their snares by refusing to become entangled in legalisms and plots. Rather, he dealt with both the accusers and the accused directly as spiritual, ethical, human persons. He spoke directly to the accusers in the con¬text of their own personal ethical conduct: “If there is one of you who has not sinned, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” To the accused woman he spoke with compassion, but without approving her conduct: “‘Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?’ She said, ‘No one, Lord.’ And Jesus said, ‘Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.’”

Regarding the status of women, the woman being caught in the act of adultery, according to the Law of Moses must to be stoned to death. But since the type of execution mentioned was stoning, the woman must have been a “virgin betrothed,” as referred to in Dt 22:23f. It states both the man and the woman must be stoned, although in the Gospel story only the woman is brought forward. However, the reason given for why the man ought to be stoned was not because he had violated the woman, or God’s law, but “because he had violated the wife (property) of his neighbor.” It was the injury to the man (not the wife or betrothed) that was the great evil. Jesus defended her; he did not condemn her; he declared her a person, definitely not the property of a man.

Adapted from Leonard Swidler, Biblical Affirmations of Women

Adele Hebert is an independent scholar, who lives in northern Alberta, Canada. Adele has been writing articles, bible studies and editing Christian books, all about how Jesus loves women. Adele has helped God’s Word to Women website, Christians for Biblical Equality, and recently worked with Leonard Swidler on his latest book, Jesus Was A Feminist. Currently Adele is writing a series of bible studies on how Jesus gave women a voice.