RELECTION ON FEMINISM

A general definition of feminism could be the study and attempt to diminish oppressions of gender, race, sex, and class. However, many people have different ideas about how to implement change, so there are the different branches of “feminisms”. There are liberal feminists, radical feminists, and Christian feminists. The list could continue on and on.

The difference between secular feminism (concerned mainly with inequality laws and cultural inequality) and Christian feminism are comparable to being two poles on a spectrum of feminism.

Although the word ‘feminism’ was not in use 2,000 years ago, the coupling of ‘Christian’ to it is the resurrection of the “Way” Jesus Christ taught us: equality, unity in diversity, egalitarian behaviour, freedom and turning our attention also to the wonders of nature. It is thus far from outmoded.

The concept of discipleship of equals is not a new one. We observe it in the interactions Jesus had with women and men. He never told women, he never had to tell women to stay at home and take care of their families. The discipleship he called everyone to was not of the organic family it was to the family of the world.

The principle of a discipleship of equals underpins Christian feminism today. Christian feminism is a branch of Feminist Theology.

Although I am drawn to rather elaborating on Christian feminism, I feel that this reflection should begin with secular feminism. This will help me to flesh out the beginnings of women’s awakening to themselves as deserving equal consideration as human beings, and the subsequent evolvement of the whole social movement.

The Oxford dictionary defines feminism as “Advocacy of extended recognition of claims and achievements of women; advocacy of women’s rights.”

Roget’s Thesaurus gives “women’s liberation movement, women’s rightist; feminist; women’s activist suffragette; suffragist.

Collins Concise Encyclopaedia: women’s suffrage = right of women to vote.

This Encyclopaedia goes on to map the development in both UK and US. This gives the earliest date with the publication of a book in the UK (1792) proposing women’s right to vote and written by Mary Wollstonecraft. The first suffrage committee was formed in 1865, thereafter taking thirty-odd years before local suffrage committees unified in a National Society. Women – over thirty years old - achieved the right to vote in the UK in 1918 only after they became more militant in 1903, a movement which was headed by Emmeline Pankhurst.

It is noteworthy that quite independent of the UK, the first US National Woman suffrage Association was formed in 1869 to agitate for constitutional amendment. {Women’s global consciousness was awakening!} The US movement was born out of women’s involvement in the anti-slavery movement. Working for the freedom of other human beings no doubt highlighted their own ‘slavery’ to misogyny! They likewise gained equal suffrage in 15 states in 1918.

This source also mentions that WW I accelerated progress, leading to the 19th Amendment of the US Constitution which made the denial of women’s right to vote unconstitutional.

Prior to the suffrage movement, women had successfully won for themselves the right to own property first in the UK and then slowly, in various states in the US. Almost concurrent with the suffrage movement the right to education – especially at a higher level - was gradually introduced. (Most educational institutions were traditionally barred to women). Women in most countries have these rights today. The exceptions are in Muslim countries but this is also changing.

Once women had won these rights in most western societies: sharing on equal terms with men the right to be educated, own property, benefit from political privileges afforded by representative government and, more particularly, to vote in elections etc and to hold public office (true democracy), why then did the movement continue to be active?

To answer this I will quote a concerned Christian feminist:

In a lecture on the radical need for a new world-view delivered at University of California, 16th April, 1998, Sr Joan Chittister stated that two-thirds of the hungry in the world are women, likewise two-thirds of the illiterate and poor of the world are women. She goes on to say: “Now science confirmed what theology taught: women were ‘natural’ by virtue of a physiology designed for birthing rather than thinking. They were private, not public, beings; caregivers not caretakers”. She draws a corollary between the treatment meted out to ‘nature’ and to women as identical – arising from the concept of ‘having dominion over’ (Genesis 1 being adopted as the Judeo-Christian ethic). Every culture uses, needs, depends on and devalues nature and woman becomes the social symbol of ‘nature’. Sr. Joan concludes that science, theology and feminism will have to be reconciled and conjoined for us to begin to build a new world-view. She notes that each of these systems will require a shift, of course, but Christian theology is its cornerstone.

{St. Paul wrote 2,000 years ago about“...[walking] in the newness of life” Romans 6:4}

“In some parts of the world, [women] can't own property. In many parts of the world, [women] are property”. Sr. Joan Chittister in her November 3rd 2005 column in NCR “From where I stand”.

“Feminism has to confront androcentrism – the male-centredness of life – because the simplification of life to a one gendered viewpoint only – is not good for anyone or our world”.

My personal conclusion is that we still live in a male-centred, male-privileged, male-defined world – in one word: patriarchal. As long as that ideological mindset pervades society, the need for an effective feminism remains.

I see that in presenting an argument for the need for the feminist movement to be entrenched in all societies, I have moved from purely secular feminism to a rationale for Christian feminism. Let me go back and look at the spectrum between these two poles.

Secular feminism has taken various directions since the middle of the 20th century. Wikipedia describes them as waves: the first wave being the suffrage movement; the second wave (1960s-1980s) generally dealing with the inequality of laws and cultural inequality and the third (1990s – current) as being a continuation of the second wave, as well as dealing with its failures.

The first movement was not purely about women’s right to vote as I showed previously. The noteworthy point is that it began with women who obviously had great courage and determination. They were fiercely opposed, criticised and belittled, yet on both continents there were men who supported and assisted them.

The second wave gave voice to the discontent felt by many women who, after graduation, had very limited opportunities to do much with their lives outside the home. The second World War which had used ‘women-power’ to keep the wheels of industry and arms manufacturing, in particular, going had shown women that they were as capable as men in the work-force. The term ‘woman’s liberation’ was first used in 1964.This was also the era when the proliferation of feminist literature took off.

Many of the negatives associated with feminism such as ‘bra-burning’ (possibly a fiction) came into being. Negative associations with woman’s liberation seem to be stuck in the minds today of too many who have not looked carefully at the big picture. This negativity may also be a result of an unconscious fear of ‘women power’.

Although associated with the third wave, one of the branches in the late 1980s surfaced with women of colour – especially in the US. They felt that race related subjectivities made a difference. For me it stands to reason, people were and are racist with perceptions of the ‘other’ being different. This is a sad fact of human nature and obviously made a big difference in perceptions of goals for feminism. A white privileged woman had different needs and perceptions of injustice to the perceptions of a woman of colour, and vice versa.

Another development during the second wave was that lesbians became more visible, voicing that they had been sidelined by both gay and woman’s liberation movements. Lesbians felt they should be central to the movement as they represented a fundamental threat to male supremacy. They were welcomed into the mainstream and thus the movement became a target for the backlash of male supremacy enthusiasts.

The advent of artificial birth control during this era gained the interest of women who felt they had the right to contraception and birth control. The vision of the movement at this time was clearly to gain full economic independence from men. I do not wish to reflect here on the issue of abortion because – although it is often blamed on ‘feminist’ ideology - its origins are far more complex than the advocacy of women’s rights would explain. I shall try to show later on why some feminists see the sexual revolution (including abortion) primarily as a tool used by men to gain easy access to sex without taking on the responsibilities of marriage, family and traditional social norms.

In order to bring this ‘pole’ of secular feminism towards closing, I give an excerpt from Wikipedia on feminism:

“Nancy Cott draws a distinction between modern feminism and its antecedents, particularly the struggle for suffrage. In the United States she places the turning point in the decades before and after women obtained the vote in 1920 (1910-1930). She argues that the prior woman movement was primarily about woman as a universal entity, whereas over this 20 year period it transformed itself into one primarily concerned with social differentiation, attentive to individuality and diversity. New issues dealt more with woman's condition as a social construct, gender identity, and relationships within and between genders. Politically this represented a shift from an ideological alignment comfortable with the right, to one more radically associated with the left.”

Wikipedia definition on Christian feminism:

Christian feminism is an aspect of feminist theology which seeks to advance and understand the equality of men and women morally, socially, spiritually, and in leadership from a Christian perspective. Christian feminists argue that contributions by women in that direction are necessary for a complete understanding of Christianity. Christian feminists believe that God does not discriminate on the basis of biologically-determined characteristics such as sex and race. Their major issues include the ordination of women, male dominance in Christian marriage, recognition of equal spiritual and moral abilities, reproductive rights, and the search for a feminine or gender-transcendent divine. Christian feminists often draw on the teachings of other religions and ideologies in addition to biblical evidence.

Another source:

‘Christian feminism is a belief system, ideology, and an identity of feminism that combines Christian beliefs with feminist theory.’ This is why it is considered a branch of Feminist Theology.

King (2004) describes feminism in her article and says “I simply mean the modern women’s movement in its different phases….it aims to establish women’s freedom from all kinds of oppression and bondage” (p. 195).

“The vision of feminism empowers many women today, and Christians must recognize that the great feminist themes of liberation, celebration and community are also the central themes at the heart of the Christian gospel.” (King, 2004, p. 205)

[King, U. (2004).Christianity and Feminism: Do They Need Each Other?. International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church. 4, 194-206.]

It has been noted in some writings on feminism that many of the first suffragettes were Christian and so deserve the title Christian Feminists. The evolvement of the distinction ‘Christian Feminist’ came about partly because of the negative stereotypes of feminism alluded to above. One of the goals today should be the diminishment of these stereotypes. In the meantime, some women involved in Christian ministry or in the advocacy of gender equality and equity prefer to stay away from the F-word and associate themselves rather with the term Christian egalitarianism. The movement remains, however, a deep well of successful struggles against sexism, racism, colonialism, heterosexism, and the like that can help set priorities and implement strategies that work, in the Church and in the world.

True feminism is never either/or! It always seeks “balance”.

The very survival of millions of women and their children globally, hangs in the balance. We owe it to all of the poor, illiterate and oppressed, a feminist ministry in the deepest sense of the word. We do not want to perpetuate an imperial colonialist type Christian ministry in a feminine dress.

Quote from an article by Fr. John Nieuhaus in National Review (25/11/1988) on Pope John Paul II: "On the Dignity and Vocation of Women."

Those who expected John Paul to issue a polemic against feminism will surely be disappointed. He agrees with the Second Vatican Council that the hour has come "when the vocation of women is being acknowledged in its fullness, the hour in which women acquire in the world an influence, an effect, and a power never hitherto achieved." The Biblical teaching of mutual service between man and woman, he writes, "must gradually establish itself in hearts, consciences, behaviours, and customs." This has not yet happened. Not by a long shot. He draws a comparison with the case of Biblical teaching and slavery. "Yet how many generations were needed for such a principle to be realized in the history of humanity through the abolition of slavery!" So John Paul acknowledges that something momentous is afoot in this century's churnings about the relationship between men and women.

The Catholic Church has been saying since John Paul II wrote about women’s roles that women and men need to collaborate (as opposed to the secular movement that appears to simply want a slice of the pie). Christian feminists say that collaboration must also be interreligious. We are concerned about sisters of faith and even concerned about those who lack faith – all matter.

Feminist ministry is a justice-seeking activity which is why more and more, women are coming to see that feminism connects with Christianity, that being a Christian means being truly feminist. Put in the words of an active female pastor “True Christianity is one that has a feminist perspective”.

The institution of Church is, however, not feminist. This is clear because they do not act upon the belief that the priesthood of the faithful is the backbone of the Body of Christ. The Church of Christ would not be hierarchical and based on the standards of the ‘Holy Roman Empire’ if they did. We are family, the family of Christ. The Kingdom is within the hearts and minds of believers and there is only one Monarch. In human form our King was the servant of all.

“Androcentrism is unspiritual because it ignores the spiritual – and the intellectual – value of the other half of the human race; it is immoral because it exploits the rest of creation. And it is unchristian because it fails to find God incarnate in everything. That’s why feminism denies the universalisation of male-only experience. Women want their vision honoured for the sake of the human race. Women know that feeling is not non-thinking – it is another way of thinking – and they want those feelings factored into decisions, not just for their own sake, but for the sake of the human race. For the same reason they reject hierarchy and domination”. (Chittister lecture referred to earlier).

Sr. Joan explains all this and says ecofeminism is the solution to all our problems because it integrates Genesis 2, science and the fullness of humanity. It reconceives all the branches of feminism.

This reflection is a beginning. Perhaps it is only the tip of an iceberg.

I close with some quotes (both old and new):

We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul.

Frances Ellen Watkins Harper - Proceedings of the Eleventh Women's Rights Convention (1866).

I stand before you as a moral being ... and as a moral being I feel that I owe it to the suffering slave and the deluded master, to my country and to the world, to do all that I can to overturn a system of complicated crimes, built upon the broken hearts and the prostrate bodies of my countrymen in chains and cemented by the blood, sweat, and tears of my sisters in bonds.

Angelina Grimké - Abolitionist and feminist (1805-1879)

For millenia women have dedicated themselves almost exclusively to the task of nurturing, protecting, and caring for the young and the old, striving for the conditions of peace that favor life as a whole. ... The education and empowerment of women throughout the world cannot fail to result in a more caring, tolerant, just, and peaceful life for all.

Aung San Suu Kyi - Burma's pro-democracy leader and political prisoner, 64 years old and awaiting the verdict on her most recent arrest (2009)

Feminism's agenda is basic: It asks that women not be forced to choose between public justice and private happiness.

Susan Faludi U.S. feminist and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist

Resistance to oppression is often based on a love that leads us to value ourselves, and leads us to hope for more than the established cultural system is willing to grant ... such love is far more energizing than guilt, duty, or self-sacrifice. ... Solidarity does not require self-sacrifice, but an enlargement of the self to include community with others.

Sharon Welch “The Feminist Ethic of Risk”

Peace is inextricably linked with equality between women and men.

U.N. Security Council, at their open debate on women, peace, and security (October 2002)

Listening at Jesus’ Words from the Cross:

"All must be friends
All must be loved,
All must be held dear,
All must be helped."

St. Teresa of Avila - The Way of Perfection