The Woman Question

Too many comments are getting too thin — last minute, slap-dash, not much there. That has to change. Serious comments only, please.

The New York Times

OP-ED COLUMNIST

Religion and WomenBy NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

Published: January 9, 2010

Religions derive their power and popularity in part from the ethical compass they   offer. So why do so many faiths help perpetuate something that most of us regard as profoundly unethical: the oppression of women?

It is not that warlords in Congo cite Scripture to justify their mass rapes (although the last warlord I met there called himself a pastor and wore a button reading “rebels for Christ”). It’s not that brides are burned in India as part of a Hindu ritual. And there’s no verse in the Koran that instructs Afghan thugs to throw acid in the faces of girls who dare to go to school.

Yet these kinds of abuses — along with more banal injustices, like slapping a girlfriend or paying women less for their work — arise out of a social context in which women are, often, second-class citizens. That’s a context that religions have helped shape, and not pushed hard to change.

“Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths, creating an environment in which violations against women are justified,” former President Jimmy Carter noted in a speech last month to the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Australia.

“The belief that women are inferior human beings in the eyes of God,” Mr. Carter continued, “gives excuses to the brutal husband who beats his wife, the soldier who rapes a woman, the employer who has a lower pay scale for women employees, or parents who decide to abort a female embryo.”

Mr. Carter, who sees religion as one of the “basic causes of the violation of women’s rights,” is a member of The Elders, a small council of retired leaders brought together by Nelson Mandela. The Elders are focusing on the role of religion in oppressing women, and they have issued a joint statement calling on religious leaders to “change all discriminatory practices within their own religions and traditions.”

The Elders are neither irreligious nor rabble-rousers. They include Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and they begin their meetings with a moment for silent prayer.

“The Elders are not attacking religion as such,” noted Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland and United Nations high commissioner for human rights. But she added, “We all recognized that if there’s one overarching issue for women it’s the way that religion can be manipulated to subjugate women.”

There is of course plenty of fodder, in both the Koran and the Bible, for those who seek a theology of discrimination.

The New Testament quotes St. Paul (I Timothy 2) as saying that women “must be silent.” Deuteronomy declares that if a woman does not bleed on her wedding night, “the men of her town shall stone her to death.” An Orthodox Jewish prayer thanks God, “who hast not made me a woman.” The Koran stipulates that a woman shall inherit less than a man, and that a woman’s testimony counts for half a man’s.

In fairness, many scholars believe that Paul did not in fact write the passages calling on women to be silent. And Islam started out as socially progressive for women — banning female infanticide and limiting polygamy — but did not continue to advance.

But religious leaders sanctified existing social structures, instead of pushing for justice. In Africa, it would help enormously if religious figures spoke up for widows disenfranchised by unjust inheritance traditions — or for rape victims, or for schoolgirls facing sexual demands from their teachers. Instead, in Uganda, the influence of conservative Christians is found in a grotesque push to execute gays.

Yet paradoxically, the churches in Africa that have done the most to empower women have been conservative ones led by evangelicals and especially Pentecostals. In particular, Pentecostals encourage women to take leadership roles, and for many women this is the first time they have been trusted with authority and found their opinions respected. In rural Africa, Pentecostal churches are becoming a significant force to emancipate women.

That’s a glimmer of hope that reminds us that while religion is part of the problem, it can also be part of the solution. The Dalai Lama has taken that step and calls himself a feminist.

Another excellent precedent is slavery. Each of the Abrahamic faiths accepted slavery. Muhammad owned slaves, and St. Paul seems to have condoned slavery. Yet the pioneers of the abolitionist movement were Quakers and evangelicals like William Wilberforce. People of faith ultimately worked ferociously to overthrow an oppressive institution that churches had previously condoned.

Today, when religious institutions exclude women from their hierarchies and rituals, the inevitable implication is that females are inferior. The Elders are right that religious groups should stand up for a simple ethical principle: any person’s human rights should be sacred, and not depend on something as earthly as their genitals.

•

I invite you to comment on this column on my blog, On the Ground. Please also join me on Facebook, watch my YouTube videos and follow me on Twitter.

Comments

[kmcnutt]

Barefoot and pregnant, we've all have heard it. The old saying about women being caretakers of the home and family. I believe this is a duty that can, and should be shared. Obviously not the actual carrying and birthing of child, but that could be considered in some relationships too. Women are capable of all sorts of things. Just take a single mother for example. In a day's work, she will get herself and children ready for work and school, drop off kids and spend a full day at work. Possibly taking her lunch hour to buy groceries, run errands or take care of a sick child at home. When she arrives at home, she is expected to cook dinner, help with homework, laundry, clean up after dinner and get her children to bed. All the while, taking care of her own needs as well. This job is tiring. My mother spent the majority of my childhood working this hard. Women can take on most any job and preform as well as a man.
A man can take on almost any job that has been traditionally reserved for women. I know this as well from first hand experience. My father has been both the mother and father of our house for 14 years. He has taken on the house chores, worked full time and been a strong influence for my brother and me. Men can do a woman's job just like a woman. Tradition and our upbringing may teach us different, but the fact is, they are interchangeable.
As far as the Church and religion, people have different views and translate passage and scripture differently. Even among the same denomination, even among the same family. For example, my mother and I strongly disagree on what the act of submitting to your husband should look like. We have a hard time discussing this topic because our ideas and views are so far apart. This debate, on one hand, comes from one party not wanting to see the views of the other with a listening ear. The other party listening but not understanding how the other can be so narrow. Both parties can be counted for wrong, but which is the right way to think?
I think women should be given the chance to succeed at whatever they feel a need and calling for. God used many women throughout the Bible to accomplish tasks that only they could do. For a man to say that a women is not, righteous enough or strong enough in a sense to preach, is going against her personal strength and understanding of her faith.
The last line in this article is something to think about, "...any person's human rights should be sacred, and not depend on something as earthly as their genitals."

[Sarah Thullbery]

"The woman question" is one thing that really upsets me about religion. I don't think that, biologically speaking, anyone would make the mistake of saying that men and women are the same. There are actual differences between the sexes. However, the idea of gender and gender roles are social constructs. While, as the article points out, religion can do a lot of good and bring about social change, it also often does the opposite. I think that many religions, particularly Christianity, are focusing on tradition instead of the actual words, spirit, and context of the holy texts. Also, this is another emotionally charged issue, and so discussion and conversation that could be critical and constructive generally ends up with hot tempers and distress. It seems like I can't do anything constructive because it's hard to even begin a conversation with someone who disagrees with me on this issue.

[mgn]

Religion should never play a fact on how one is treated because of sex nor should any other factors of society do this as well. Throughout history women have been treated as inferior beings next to men. And the reason for this has never been clear except for the fact like we have brought up in class that women have been stereotyped for so long as nothing more than baby-making house sitters. This is sad to see especially in today’s world where we are brought up to believe that anyone can become do anything that they want to. The possibilities are supposed to be available for those set forth the effort to seek out and succeed their goals. But even though the laws were re-written to make both men and women equal, but men still refuses to accept these new ways because they live off their fathers old teachings.

[Tyler]

Well, I agree whole-heartedly with women's rights. But, there are scriptures that point to roles a woman plays. Most of these I would say come from a social tradition of the roles of women, and I don't think that most people realize that society changes.

I don't think it is very effective at all that men are having to stand up for women's rights though. If a society is supposed to change the beliefs they have about women being just as strong as men when it comes to leadership...why in the world are male leaders the ones who are actually doing something in the eye of the public? You cannot expect someone to take this movement seriously when the women involved can't even lead it!

[David Cook]

I am going to have to say that I do believe that men and women are exactly equal. Both can perform the same tasks and in many cases women are even more skilled and qualified than their male counterparts. I think that we just have to understand that our culture and society does indeed change. With those changes come definitions of roles and in the case of our modern culture we have finally come to the realization that women and men are indeed equal.

I'm also going to have to agree with Tyler. If women are going to fight for their rights, and progress the equal rights movement for themselves then they need to take themselves seriously as well.

[Brandon]

I think men and women were created equally and meant to be treated as such. I also think we should follow the bible when it says women should obey their husbands. But women should obey their husbands to an extent to where they aren't degraded and physically or mentally abused. I do not think it should be what the man says goes. Women should be able to make their own input on things said by their husands. When Jimmy Carter says women are inferior in the eyes of God, I think that is wrong. Religion certainly doesn't justify why men beat their wives. I think things in the bible are taken to literally and misunderstood. When the bible was written it was a different time. Anyone being stoned is outrageous today. Not saying that stoning someone was okay back when the bible was written but it was more excepted than it is today. I just think the bible should be taken literally things would be different. I believe God cares about humans, not if you're male or female.

[quicktype89]

"You cannot expect someone to take this movement seriously when the women involved can't even lead it!"

Wow David and Tyler shame on you. What evidence do you have to prove such a statement?! Remember we live in the bible belt so all too often we do see women who kowtow to the dominate
Males of their families and male leaders within the church because of the fear of challenging a biblical belief, not to mention a belief they were raised on. Please tell me other than the failures of a small sect of cowardly women, how have women not lead their own revolution? Who picketed in the streets for women's voting rights in the early 1900s? Women! What kinds of groups were formed in the feminist movement of the 70s and 80s? FEMALE GROUPS! Females are the ones leading a fight for their rights, but of course they are asking for help from their male counterparts to back them up!
The idea is on par with the abolitionist movement during pre-civil war times. If not for those white un-ensalaved men and women how on earth could the enslaved african population done it on their own? Likewise women want all the support they can get to prove what equality means-equal treatment and respect of the sexes even if that means that a male group may need to lead because of social discrimination in a region.

As for the argument about what is commonly believed (or misunderstood) about what the Bible states is the role of women-to submit to authority. Sadly these verses have been construed over time and turned into a male ideal that women are to be practically enslaved by the authority of their husbands-when looking at the extreme view that is. However biblical submission is not that!
We look at 1 Peter 2:13-17 we see that we as Christians are called to accept authority, yet live as free people in a righteous manner, and called to honor all while fearing God. Step one in understanding submission is seeing that the Bible calls us to think broadly about our relationships to authority; that we are not to accept all that is thrown at us, but to challenge it according to a God fearing perspective.
Next we look at Chapter 3 of 1 Peter, the origin of our female controversy. We see that it calls for women to submit to their husbands for a peaceful relationship, BUT it also calls for MEN to treat their wives and show consideration in the SAME WAY (verse 7). Step two in understanding that submission is not about over powering a sex or abusing a privilege, but about creating equal partnership in relationships. This can be further explored by examining the holy trinity and how one aspect of God does not out do the other-something we are to strive to replicate.
Lastly we examine verses 8 and 9 of Chapter 3 and see that we are to have a "unity of spirit" and are called not to repay "abuse for abuse, but repay abuse for a blessing," meaning that we are to be thinking of all people and respecting an equality of all when applying biblical submission to our lives which is an act of genuine love and faith, and that when experiencing abuse we are not to abuse back or allow the abuse to continue, but we are to rebuke with a blessing, in which case that blessing may be challenging the evils of social injustice, for equality. Perfect submission should create a stable body, but if we rebuke with evil there will be no solution, just as if we allow ourselves to be trampled upon by injustice we are not Glorifying Gods will for his people.
Just look at Christ in following the idea of submission as presented by God. He did not fight back with violence, nor did he let injustice stand. Let that be a lesson to those who do not understand the concept of submission and believe it only to have a negative face.
1 Peter 2:15
"For it is God's will that by doing RIGHT you should silence the ignorance of the foolish."
So how is it that the oppression of women is considered biblically sound? How is it not God's will for women to preach the pure and simple biblical teachings of equality and justice through social reform? Human interference in the understanding of morality and faith is our demise, not the "will" of God.

[JohnEvans]

I don't understand how under the Christian biblical prospective women can be seen as second class. It appears closer to the opposite, that males are closer to second class, with which I, as a male, have no problems. This is mentioned mostly as in the context of marriage. In Ephesains 5:28, a man is called to love his wife more then his own body. From multiple sermons I have heard on this subject the original greek implies a man giving up his desires and longings for his wives. Just before this passage It states that a man is to do for his wife what Christ did for the Church, that is lay down his life for her. Wives are called to submit to their cause without a appointment things would be more chaotic. Thus in an ideal situation a wife does what her husband wants but he is acting in her best interests first. There are some church positions, ruling and teaching elders, and a few others implied by the same standards but all other leadership roles are still open to women. I do not know the reason for this but simply accept it on faith. I do not believe this policy in any way makes women second class especially with the rest of scripture..

[Tyler]

Quicktype89--

Evidence? Read above article. I agree that women like Susan B. Anthony and the picketing women leaders of those incredible decades were definitely influential. Those people are gone though. You cannot compare that to now when the person who is influenced is the female manager whose salary is lower than a man's. Those days were about women actually having the opportunity to be in this position.

Now they are here...they have to make a stand. Now it's time for those women to not just have someone say they can lead and work just as well as men, but to show that! Marilyn vos Savant said it best when she said, ”. . . what women want is what men want. They want respect.” I completely agree! But, Mark A. Clement also made a valid point, ”Leaders who win the respect of others are the ones who deliver more than they promise, not the ones who promise more than they can deliver.” It's left to the women who are currently employed, but not receiving the same compensation--not past Presidents--to stand up.

[quicktype89]

Tyler-
So standing up...Well... Just ask my Mom. She has been fighting with her partner for over 20 years about her salary being lower than his. Women are taking a stand although it is often private. Lets face it men do hold an authoritative majority today, and although women are fighting that they can't do it alone. Just look at our leaders. They are mostly male and the ones in power, and the same can be said throughout the world, so how can women not be somewhat dependent on the support and aid from men to fight against those who have sexist views. It's hard being a woman and trying to speak out for something you believe in to a male majority that all to often only see you as the pretty secretary not as the strong leader. We need supportive men to help us in the effort of fighting against second-class citizenship.
That is what I am referring to when I say I see no evidence that women aren't doing anything. They are and they are asking for the help of men. Fighting for equality must be a mutual effort between men and women.
Also how is the above article showing that there is evidence that men are doing it alone? There are women in the Elders group. And how is the help of past presidents harmful to women trying to break through the glass ceiling? It only backs their support further with credible and internationally recognized people.

[Larz]

I don't see how someone could say that the Bible thinks as women as second class or inferior to men. People who say that are really taking the Bible way to literally. Yes, it says that women should obey their husbands, but how does someone get that women are inferior out of that. God created every human equal. Black, white, male, or female we are all equal in Gods eyes, no one is superior than another. Just because a woman has different roles than a man does not mean that that makes them any less important. Women should have never been treated the way they have been through our history, just as any other race has been. Women should have always been equal in society, besides where would the world be without us..over! And that little picture at the top that says "man recieves insight from God, women repeat wisdon from man" really makes me mad. God sees everyone as equal, so everyone has to ablity to have to same relationship with God. Its not like only men can have a relationship with him and learn from God, and then women just copy men. No, thats dumb, we have can have a relationship and talk to God.

[Julie Jackson]

Men and women may be different, but they were created equally. Men are physically stronger while women are more subtle. I think that men and woman should not nessasairly try to be alike but try to be themselves and realize that God has created us unique. We should try to use our unique abilities to pursue life goals and work together. I think that God views everyone as a human not male or female. Some things may be harder for woman and some things harder for men. The main thing we can accomplish is use our differences to complement each other and improve life. We each need to live up to our potential and see that there are some differences, but not look down on each other because we are not exactly alike. Both sexes are equally important.

[Morgan]

I think that it is obvious in our society that women are considered less than men and that they can't do the same jobs as men. In the military for example: women are not allowed to fight in combat, women are not allowed to be Navy SEALs, and women are not allowed to go on submarines in the Navy. I can understand if some women can not do these jobs because in most cases women are unable to perform these jobs. But, there are some women that can do these things and maybe do them exceptionally well. I just don't understand that if everyone is supposed to be equal why women are not allowed to participate in certain jobs.

[cdavis17]

I believe that I am a feminist myself, and I believe that women today are very capable of doing anything a man can do. We are just as smart and I think that we have some certain attributes that will allow people to listen to us. I think that people who believe that women are second class citizens are ignorant, and just because a long time ago we were "supposed" to be pretty, have kids, clean, cook and sit at home and "bow" to our husbands; does NOT mean that it is like that now. I mean yes- Sarah Palin was not a good candidate for president, but women are actually getting some recognition as being smart, and able to be in roles to lead people. I don't see why it would be any different in a religious role, women can love God and serve God just like any man, why does it just have to be a man that can "preach" us the scriptures? I really think that we are getting better as a nation in acknowledging women as equals, but it is not to where it should be. I hope that in the future it continues getting better.

[Sarah Thullbery]

While I think it is wrong to say women haven't been leaders in the Feminist - look at Olympe de Gouges who wrote The Rights of Women in 1791 to Simone de Beauvoir who wrote The Second Sex in 1949. Look at Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi to Liberia's President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. Women have been and are leaders of the Feminist movement. Of course men are involved. Many abolitionists were free white people. They certainly took nothing away from the African Americans who were attempting to gain basic rights and equality. How are men who support feminism any different?
However, many women are against feminism and goals of women to be the equals of men. I think that the main reason that it has taken so long and it is so difficult for feminism to move forward is that women are divided. In part, I think it is caused by different definitions of feminism. Some view feminists as necessarily aggressive and even masculine while I believe it is the ability of choice. I think that feminism is the movement that will lead to women having the same ability to choose as men. I would say that the other chief cause of this division among women is religious perspectives of women's roles. I truly hope that we will progress as time moves forward.