No man can put a chain
about the ankle of his
fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck…..
Fredrick Douglas
“I was always praying for poor ole master…Oh Lord, convert ole master.
Oh dear Lord, change dat man’s heart and make him a Christian.” –Harriet
Tubman.[1] Harriet Tubman, like so many slaves, suffered terribly
at the hands of cruel masters. A few slaves had kind masters and would have
been happy to have remained slaves.[2] But these
were the exception, not the rule, and kind masters did not make the institution
of slavery any less heinous. “Good Masters” did not make slavery right:[3] “Even kind masters who found
themselves in financial straits chose their fortunes over whatever compassion
they may have had for the slaves on their land, and these masters bought and
sold those human beings as briskly as anyone else did, thereby breaking up
families and subjecting black people to a most humiliating existence….”[4]
Former slave, Fredrick Douglas,
observed that few if any masters were actually “good” and that even if they
started out that way, owning other human beings took a devastating toll on the
characters of both men and women. He wrote: “My new mistress proved to be all she appeared when I first
met her at the door—a woman of the kindest heart and finest feelings. She had
never had a slave under her control previously to myself, and prior to her
marriage she had been dependent upon her own industry for a living…she had been
in a good degree preserved from the blighting and dehumanizing effects of
slavery. I was utterly astonished at her goodness…Her face was made of heavenly
smiles, and her voice of tranquil music. But, alas! this kind heart had but a
short time to remain such. The fatal poison of irresponsible power was already
in her hands, and soon commenced its infernal work. That cheerful eye, under
the influence of slavery, soon became red with rage; that voice, made all of
sweet accord, changed to one of harsh and horrid discord; and that angelic face
gave place to that of a demon… Slavery
proved as injurious to her as it did to me (emphasis added).”[5]
It is no different today, among
Christians, as church teachings place gender-based authority in the hands of
all males over all females creating, essentially, a master/slave mentality.
Boys raised from infancy to believe in the inherent superiority of males over
females are firmly entrenched in their sense of lordship well before they reach
adulthood. Shirley Taylor,[6] in a
telephone interview with the author, expressed concern for young Christian
males by asking, “How we can put this kind of power into the hands of a 17 year
old boy and expect him to know how to handle it?” Along the same lines, Callie Smith Grant wrote of the deleterious toll of institutionalized
slavery on the families of slaveholders.[7]
The evidence is mounting that
young men and boys cannot handle it. Belief in rigidly defined gender roles
results in deterioration of character and a propensity towards abuse or
violence at younger ages than ever before.[8] College
campuses have become hotbeds of domestic violence with one in five coeds
experiencing abuse or violence at the hands of boyfriends. Research into the
phenomenon reveals that power and control issues based on strongly held
perceptions of rigid role distinctions are responsible for the problem.[9]
Even if a young man never resorts
to domestic violence, the damage done to the psyches of boys raised to believe
in male authority is inestimable. How many of these young men, raised to be
Lords, will never know the joy of true intimacy that can only come with
profound respect based on practical equality with one’s spouse?[10]
The slave-holding spirit,
manifested through complementarianism, cannot help but produce constant erosion
on the characters of the slaveholders, callusing tender consciences and slowly
turning caring hearts of flesh into dis-compassionate hearts of stone. And when
does this stony heart become apparent, if not by adolescence or college age,
perhaps on the honeymoon?
In “A Man’s Touch,” Charles Stanley described a scene from his own
honeymoon, a scene which he was proud to relate as an example of good marital
communication. In reality, it was far from it. Stanley proudly recounts, “It
was during our honeymoon…she cooked our first meal, and we sat down to a
delightful fried chicken dinner. I looked around and asked, “Where is the
gravy? She said, “We never had gravy with chicken.” I said, “I never had
chicken without gravy (emphasis in
original).” She rose quietly from the table and made at least a gallon—not
knowing how to make gravy, she kept adding too much of various ingredients! It
was more like jello than gravy…but I spoke up and she responded….”[11]
He “spoke up and she responded?!” Complaining about your bride’s first
home-cooked meal and comparing her meal planning and preparation to your mother’s
on your honeymoon is an example of good communication? How humiliating it must
have been for this newlywed to hear her groom criticize the first meal she had
ever cooked for them as a married couple. There is only one first meal, and no
doubt it was important to her that everything be perfect. Stanley ought to have
been ashamed for letting his bride leave the “delightful” meal she had
prepared, allowing it to grow cold while she catered to his self-centered
fancy.
How wounded her heart must have
been. And did he even care? Selfless
love, on his part, would have recoiled at the thought of his bride returning to
the stove instead of remaining at the table with him and enjoying the
“delightful”—though gravy-less—dinner together. Instead of allowing his new
wife to struggle through the humiliating gravy debacle while he mentally
congratulated himself on his communication skills, why couldn’t Stanley,
instead, have complemented her on the “delightful” meal she had prepared and
simply enjoyed it without complaining about what she had not prepared?
He could just as easily, and without
hurting his wife, have requested gravy with his chicken at a later date before
the next chicken dinner. But that
option would obviously have been too much of an assault upon his “masculine
person-hood.” The way Stanley tells it, his only other option, besides wounding
his wife on her honeymoon, would have been to sulk and wonder when she would
ever “learn how to fix a real meal?”
(Emphasis added)
Where was compassion for his
bride as he watched her make that fried egg sandwich (see chapter one) in the form of a pitiful
bowl of jello-gravy? Did it lay buried in the same grave with her hope for a
marriage based on equality and mutual respect?
We may never know the answer to that and other questions. But we do know
that Anna Stanley, after 44 years of marriage, quietly divorced Charles in May
of the year 2000.[12]
Jesus said it is better that a
millstone be hanged around our necks than to offend one of these little ones
that believe in Him. Teaching little boys that they are destined to rule over
women and teaching little girls that they are deserving of servitude is worse
than offending them, it is crippling them. It is thievery and larceny. It is
stealing a precious part of the future from children—the hope of a family of
their own based solely on love and
mutual respect rather than on authoritarian chain
of command.
This article is an excerpt from the book, Woman this is War! Gender, Slavery and the Evangelical Caste System, chapter 25.
This article is an excerpt from the book, Woman this is War! Gender, Slavery and the Evangelical Caste System, chapter 25.
[1] Harriet Tubman quoted by
Sarah H. Bradford in, Harriet, The Moses
of Her People, 1886
[2] “Lawdy! I sho' was happy
when I was a slave. "De N* today is de same as dey always was, 'ceptin'
dey's gittin' more money to spen'. Dey aint got nobody to make' em' 'have
deyse'ves an' keep 'em out o' trouble, now.” Gabe Emanuel, extracted from Mississippi Slave
Narratives, 1941
[3] “There is nothing picturesque or beautiful, in the family
attachment of old servants, which is not to be found in countries where these
servants are legally free. The tenants on an English estate are often more fond
and faithful than if they were slaves. Slavery, therefore, is not the element
which forms the picturesque and beautiful of Southern life. What is peculiar to
slavery, and distinguishes it from free servitude, is evil, and only evil, and
that continually.” Harriet Beecher Stowe, A
Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin: Presenting
The Original Facts And Documents Upon Which The Story Is Founded Together with
Corroborative Statements to the Truth of The Work, 1853.
[4] Callie Smith Grant, Free Indeed: African American Christians and
the struggle for equality, Barbour Books, 2003
“…she is still
held as a slave. I well remember what a heart-rending scene there was in the
family when my father sold her husband…And yet my father was considered one of
the best of masters. I know of few who were better...” Letter from former slave
owner to Harriet Beecher Stowe, A Key to
Uncle Tom's Cabin: Presenting The
Original Facts And Documents Upon Which The Story Is Founded Together with
Corroborative Statements to the Truth of The Work, 1853.
African American author, Karen Arnett Spaulding,
skillfully portrayed the realities slaves dealt with when running for freedom
was contemplated. “Even the relative
security of living on a plantation where slaves were rarely sold did not change
the feelings of a slave who yearned to be free…She did not want to think about
sleeping in the woods by day and running by night, hoping to get to the north
and freedom. And if and when they did arrive, what would they do? How would
they live?” Karen Arnett Spaulding, Running
For Their Lives, Authorhouse, 2007
[5] Fredrick Douglass, A Narrative on the Life of Frederick Douglass,
an American Slave, 1845
[7] “Another unavoidable
result of slavery James (James W. C. Pennington) wrote about was how
slaveholder’s families deteriorated over time. James wrote, ‘There is no one
feature of slavery to which the mind recurs with more gloomy impressions than
to its disastrous influence upon the families of the masters…’ Slaves had
always observed this phenomenon—that each generation of slaveholders in a
family was more inferior than the one before, as if a family business of
investing in slave labor simply could not survive morally or physically.”
Callie Smith Grant, Free Indeed: African
American Christians and the struggle for equality, Barbour Books, 2003
[8] “…traditional gender role
attitudes in a sample of adolescents were also associated with less perceived
seriousness of scenarios depicting interpersonal aggression.” (Hilton, Harris,
& Rice, 2003).
[9] “Dating and courtship violence on college campuses is a ‘major
hidden social problem;" (Makepeace, 1981, p. 100) that can affect 1 in 5
college students directly and can indirectly affect an even greater number. Gender Role Attitudes, Religion, and Spirituality as
Predictors of Domestic Violence Attitudes in White College Students, Journal of College
Student Development, Mar/Apr 2004, by Berkel, LaVerne A, Vandiver, Beverly J, Bahner, Angela D
“Studies
have shown that about 20% of college men and women reported being involved in a
physically violent intimate relationship.” (Luthra & Gidyez, 2001;
Makepeace, 1986; Silverman & Williamson, 1997)
“Besides
sex (Finn, 1986; Saunders, Lynch, Grayson, & Linz, 1987), the most
consistent predictor of attitudes that support the use of violence against
women among college students or any other group is gender role attitudes,
defined as beliefs about appropriate roles for men and women (McHugh &
Frieze, 1997). Gender role attitudes are best conceptualized as falling on a
continuum, ranging from traditional to egalitarian. Individuals with
traditional attitudes are characterized as responding to others based on
stereotypical characteristics associated with their sex, whereas individuals
with egalitarian attitudes respond to others independent of their sex.” (King,
Beere, King, & Beere, 1981). Gender Role
Attitudes, Religion, and Spirituality as Predictors of Domestic Violence
Attitudes in White College Students, Journal of College Student Development,
Mar/Apr 2004, by Berkel, LaVerne
A, Vandiver, Beverly J, Bahner, Angela D
“Men who believe in strong traditional family values are more
abusive to their partners and family members. This behavior is fortified by
preaching that accepts all sorts of cultural assumptions about what
"headship" means.” Barrington H. Brennen, Why
Do Christian Husbands Abuse Their Wives, Barrington H. Brennen,
Counseling Psychologist, Marriage & Family Therapist,
[10] “Black Americans knew
that freedom and basic rights as human beings were God-given and that no other
human being should tamper with that. They knew they were made in the image of
God, and that to do God’s work, they needed to be free.” Callie Smith Grant, Free Indeed: African American Christians and
the struggle for equality, Barbour Books, 2003
[11] Stanley, Charles, A Man’s Touch, Victor Books, Wheaton,
ILL, 1988
[12] “I have never met a woman
who wanted to leave a husband who was a Christlike head of the home…Women who
want “freedom” or to “do as they please” have a basic problem of resistance to
God…This attitude breeds frustration, anxiety, and an empty search for meaning
in a wife who is confused about her proper role in the family.” Charles Stanley, A Man’s Touch, Victor Books, Wheaton, ILL, 1988
Woman this is WAR! Gender Slavery and the Evangelical Caste System examines Bible commentary and translation practices which have historically been androcentric (male centered) and even misogynistic (anti-woman). These have adversely effected understanding of the scriptures, relations between women and men, the happiness of men and women, and, in general, has hindered the work of the gospel, by forbidding women to preach, pastor, or serve as elders or deacons. The book chronicles the early history of the women's rights movements, as well as the role of church leadership in aggressively suppressing both women's rights and the historical record of Christian initiatives within the movements. Through the complementarian movement, many of the same arguments used to support the institution of slavery, are still used today in suppressing the rights of Christian women. This book documents identical arguments used by Christian leaders against both movements and is an unparalleled resource for all who desire an in-depth study of gender equality from a Christian perspective. The history of women’s rights is traced back [much further than usual] to the very first feminists…who were Christians—godly women, who brought the issue of women's rights to the forefront as they struggled to alleviate the suffering of others, and found they were hindered in doing so for no other reason than the fact of their sex. This work, provides valuable historical insight into Christian initiatives in the movements for women’s rights, that are rarely included in Christian literature. Visit this link for more information or to buy the book: Woman this is WAR! Gender Slavery and the Evangelical Caste System
Woman this is WAR! Gender Slavery and the Evangelical Caste System examines Bible commentary and translation practices which have historically been androcentric (male centered) and even misogynistic (anti-woman). These have adversely effected understanding of the scriptures, relations between women and men, the happiness of men and women, and, in general, has hindered the work of the gospel, by forbidding women to preach, pastor, or serve as elders or deacons. The book chronicles the early history of the women's rights movements, as well as the role of church leadership in aggressively suppressing both women's rights and the historical record of Christian initiatives within the movements. Through the complementarian movement, many of the same arguments used to support the institution of slavery, are still used today in suppressing the rights of Christian women. This book documents identical arguments used by Christian leaders against both movements and is an unparalleled resource for all who desire an in-depth study of gender equality from a Christian perspective. The history of women’s rights is traced back [much further than usual] to the very first feminists…who were Christians—godly women, who brought the issue of women's rights to the forefront as they struggled to alleviate the suffering of others, and found they were hindered in doing so for no other reason than the fact of their sex. This work, provides valuable historical insight into Christian initiatives in the movements for women’s rights, that are rarely included in Christian literature. Visit this link for more information or to buy the book: Woman this is WAR! Gender Slavery and the Evangelical Caste System
No comments:
Post a Comment