One does not have to venture far into an examination of Western norms and attitudes to see that each gender is widely thought to hold exclusive forms of power over the other that are complementary in nature. Women are taught that they have a specific power over men, and men are taught that they have a specific power over women. The most visible religious and secular beliefs about the matter easily overlap. They may not always be explicitly taught by words, but, when they are, they are clearly communicated in passing conversations, church services, and entertainment alike. It might actually be difficult for some people to go an entire day without hearing them reiterated in some way.
Even when it is not stated directly, the shared secular and Christian complementarianism in Western culture plainly teaches that both genders have inverse powers over each other. Women are taught that they have a kind of sensual power over men because of their bodies, with men supposedly becoming nothing but simple-mindedly fixated on sex at the sight of the female body (even though men are not attracted to all women to begin with). Meanwhile, men are taught that they have power over women that comes from physical strength, with women being helplessly resigned to the fear of being sexually assaulted by men (even though many women have committed sexual assault and many women are never victimized in this way).
These twin ideas are used to encourage everything from a perpetual, gratuitous fear of male sexuality on the part of women to the expectation on the part of men that they must make themselves human beasts of burden for women. It should be apparent to any thinker that these results are deeply harmful to individual men and women and to the societies they contribute to, and yet they are verbally and nonverbally enforced by the imbeciles who think God or "natural law" is behind them. Beyond their relational destructiveness, these consequences are simply rooted in ideas that are demonstrably false.
The male body is not an unattractive thing that has only minimal influence on women in general, nor is it a vessel of inherent strength that cannot be abused by women; inversely, the female body is not an inherently weak vessel that is incapable of harming or protecting itself from abusive men. The complementarian ideas surrounding the power that men and women have over each other are not only entirely false, but also incredibly damaging to both genders. Some women may have a "visual" power over some men and some men may have physical power over some women, but the opposite is also true in many cases.
Whatever power a person might have over others is not tied to their gender. Instead, it is tied to social and physical factors that vary from individual to individual. Physical male beauty and physical female strength can be quite powerful, even if they are not acknowledged anywhere nearly as often their opposites--physical female beauty and physical male strength--are accepted. As with all truths, of course, the faulty perceptions of the majority does not dictate reality. Power is easily found outside of the places those who submit to complementarian traditions expect it to reside in.
It's funny you bring up "the female body is not an inherently weak vessel" because I know there are complementarians who refer to 1 Peter 3:7, which commands husbands treating their wives with respect "as the weaker vessel". The translated word used here does mean a feebleness of some sort or lack of strength. I'm sure the line of reasoning here is something like "see, the bible says that women are metaphysically different from men because for example it says right here they're the weaker gender" and use that as further evidence for the complementarian worldview. My hunch is to chalk this up as simply a cultural observation? As at the time women in those societies didn't possess the same rights and powers as men did.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like it's just emphasizing ethical treatment of all people regardless of their class status, for "all are one in Christ Jesus"(Gal. 3:28) similar to the slave/master relationship. I mean after all, that same command refers to treating them as "fellow heirs of the gift of life". Sounds pretty egalitarian to me.
Lol I may have just answered my own question but what other observations you have about that verse??
Since 1 Peter 3:7 does ultimately treat men and women as spiritual/metaphysical equals, its comment about women being "weaker vessels" would have to mean something exactly like what you suggested in order to not contradict the rest of the same verse! The ideas behind the complementarian misinterpretation of this verse are actually far more foundational to their ideology than theological conservatives might think. At least a great deal of the historical and current sexism against women and men reduces down to the idea that women are physically weak and men are physically powerful. Without this myth, it would be even more obvious that it is fallacious to argue that women should be barred from the workplace, the military, and so on, and it would be even more obvious that it is fallacious to trivialize crimes against men and expect them to put themselves in danger specifically for women. It is impossible for equals to deserve differing legal, marital, and broad social levels of respect, yet complementarians pretend this is not the case. Women cannot be rationally or justly excluded from societal power and men cannot be rationally or justly treated with a lesser respect than that shown to women.
Delete