A. K. Chidgzey

Feminism, in general, is the pursuit of equality between the genders. This includes the assumption that women have generally been suppressed for the majority of human history, that there has generally been a bias toward men, and that political and economic structures privilege and favour men. So feminism is about challenging this, disrupting the assumptions that privilege men, and carving out a space, a voice, and a platform for women.   

And let’s be honest, this assumption is absolutely true and the feminist cause is absolutely necessary.

In the first century, a woman was considered so unreliable that her voice counted for nothing in any legal proceedings. In fact it was sometimes assumed that women were so untrustworthy or incompetent that the truth must be the opposite of whatever she says. This makes the fact of women being the first eyewitnesses of Jesus’ resurrection all the more significant.

Generally, educating girls and women has either been outlawed or looked down upon. There have been some exceptions, but it took until the 18^th century for women to begin to have equal rights to education.

And of those women who could be educated, very few could write and be published without using a male pseudonym. The Brontë sisters became Currer, Ellis, and Acton Bell, Louise May Alcott became A M Barnard. Jane Austen published anonymously, as did Mary Shelley.

So texts like Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, Pride and Prejudice, and Frankenstein were published pseudonymously or anonymously because women shouldn’t be wasting their time writing but should instead be busy becoming mothers and looking after the household and husband. Even J K Rowling published under a male pseudonym, at the advice of the publisher, because despite her success with Harry Potter it was still believed that men would be put off by a crime book written by a woman.

It was only in 1908 when all Australian women were allowed to vote. Prior to this, women were believed to be emotionally or intellectually incompetent enough to engage in politics.

Women weren’t allowed credit cards without their husband or father’s approval until 1974.

Husbands could not be found guilty of raping their wives until the 1970’s and 80’s. Up until then, it was believed that upon entering into the marriage contract, the woman essentially lost the right to her own body and had to make herself available to satisfy her husband’s needs whenever he needed it.

The point here is that for most of human history, women have been suppressed. It wasn’t that long ago when women were considered little more than property.

Feminism began in the 18^th century and has come in different forms and waves, and it’s purpose is to rise up against this suppression. The Protestant Reformation in the 16^th century saw the rise in people questioning where true authority lies and who is the arbiter of truth, which extended into the Enlightenment when this challenge to religious authority evolved into a challenge to political and social authority. Feminism is the extension of this questioning, who has authority over women? Is it a husband, or a father, or a brother, or is the woman herself?

But let’s clarify what feminism is not.

It is not about tearing down men. It is not about placing women above men. It is not about women wanting to be men or trying to turn men into women.

There’s not some grand scheme to feminize men to turn them into compliant zombies or whatever the theobros are spitting or the conservative conspiracy theorists are teaching their homeschooled children.

The goal is to achieve true equality, to fix the balance. And true, this might mean that men will have a smaller slice of the pie as before, but it will still be the same size as what women are getting. Up until now men have basically been eating nine tenths of that pie.

But let’s say I’m serving up some…let’s say pizza this time. I’m serving pizza for my wife and I, and out of the 8 slices I give myself 6 and I give my wife 2. That doesn’t seem fair does it? In order to make it right, I sacrifice 2 of my slices to her, so now we both have 4. Sometimes, in order to achieve equality, those who have more need to give something up.

In order to achieve equality, men will need to give up some of the privileges we’ve become accustomed to, some of the spotlight, some of the power, some of the platform.

Some might think, “Well, that’s not fair!” And now you’re starting to get the point. It’s never been fair. It’s just men have had the better part of the deal.

I’ve heard a lot of men say, “I’m all for equality but not if it means that men have to give something up.” But I’m not really sure if it’s possible to achieve equality without men sacrificing something.

The pendulum kind of needs to swing in women’s favour before it can balance out and true equality can be achieved.

After serving pizza, my wife might come back and say, “You’ve been serving me 2 slices of pizza this whole time while you’ve been getting 6!” So I might go a few meals serving myself 2 and serving my wife 6 to even out the score a little. That’s not a great analogy, but you get the point. In the workforce, we might need to prioritize employing women over men, or pump more money into women-focused programs, just to bring that balance. This is about achieving equity, rather than just equality. And in order to truly achieve this balance, men should cheer these initiatives along.

Feminism is a very big topic, but I’d like to focus on feminist theology and biblical studies. This in itself is a big topic, so I’ll only be able to scratch the surface.

Feminist theology and biblical scholarship explores theological questions and reads scripture through the lens of a woman’s perspective. It is to critique patriarchal assumptions and structures, to interrogate the tendency to stress the masculine nature of God, to highlight the presence of women in scripture, and to provide theological contributions that men might not see. It’s about seeking justice and the liberation of women from oppressive male structures of power. This often encompasses similarly ignored or suppressed groups, such as children and the elderly. All of this is an extension of the bible’s emphasis upon the liberation of the oppressed.

The simple fact of the matter is that the bible was written by men, largely for men, has been interpreted by men, translated by men, which books to be included in the canon was decided by men, and men have generally been the gatekeepers to biblical and theological knowledge. Beyond the bible, philosophers, historians, linguists, archaeologists, anthropologists, scientists, have historically been predominately men. This is changing, but historically all knowledge and understanding of reality has come from and through a male perspective.

The bible was written by men, and though it seems to be quite radical for its time in how it treats women, is nevertheless from a male perspective. This is not to say the bible is wrong or unreliable or anything like that, nor is to say that those men tasked with writing it all down and interpreting it weren’t faithfully doing their very best, but it’s just simply and inescapably male. The task of feminist theology, then, is to read between the lines, past that male bias. God’s revelation is not just for men, so we need to peel back those layers of historically, socially, and politically conditioned male emphases to discover God’s revelation to and for women.

It’s interesting that most charismatic movements throughout history, including the early Pentecostal movements, were driven largely by women. Perhaps that is God cutting through the patriarchal red tape to speak directly to women. Perhaps.

But there is one instance where the bible was actually changed to suit a patriarchal worldview.

In Romans 16, the apostle Paul mentions a woman named Junia, who he says was prominent among the apostles. I mentioned Junia in the previous episode on egalitarianism. Early and medieval scholars recognised Junia as both a woman and an apostle, but around the 12^th or 13^th centuries the name became Junias, the male form of the name, where Junia is the female form. This may have been an accident or it may have been intentional but in 1927 it was changed to the male Junias and it took until 1998 before it again went back to the female Junia. There’s not really any other instances of names changing gender, so it’s a little bit…coincidental…that when it does happen it’s involving a female apostle.

But there are other instances in the bible where traditionally feminine aspects are applied to God, or God is actually described as or like a woman.

In Isaiah 66.13, God comforts his people “as a mother comforts her child.”

And in 49.15, God will not forget his people in the same way that a woman cannot forget “the child of her womb.”

In Luke 15, God is like a woman who loses a coin and searches for it.

God is described as a midwife, a mother bear, and a mother eagle. God is in labour, giving birth to a new creation,

‘Wisdom’ is a feminine persona, called Sophia in Greek, and is central to Proverbs. Wisdom was present at creation and some early Christians described the Spirit as mother.

In the 14^th century, Julian of Norwich said “As truly as God is our Father, so truly God is our Mother.”

In Matthew 23, Jesus describes himself as a mother hen, gathering her brood beneath her wings.

The point here is that God demonstrates both traditionally masculine and feminine aspects. Feminist scholars highlight the feminine over against the masculine, which is often stressed.

But then there’s also things like using male pronouns and descriptions when talking about God, even though God is not male. Or if God is male, then God is equally female.

I do tend to default to masculine language when referring to God, for no other reason than convention. It’s just my automatic reflex. But maybe that’s something I should work on. It is quite interesting how uncomfortable some people can get when God is called she or her, but considering the various ways that God is referred to in the bible, that both male and female are the image of God, and that God brought creation into being, I don’t think it’s inappropriate. If we can actually assign a gender to God. God kind of needs to be either both or neither.

Considering the rate of violence toward women, the stats for which I’ll mention in a moment, feminist scholars have reconsidered how we should think about the violence done to Jesus on the cross. Theories of atonement are rethought, in light of this violence experienced by women.

As Jesus went like a lamb to the cross, so wives should bear the abuse they receive from husbands. Be submissive and emulate Christ, an abusive husband might say. And abusive husbands have said. Stories such as this abound, manipulating women into staying and remaining quiet about violence done to them because they must be willing to submit to the authority of their husband.

Pastors tell women to bear the beating, knowing they are emulating Jesus. When it starts getting really bad, church elders get them in the same room to apologise to one another and to reconcile. The beating continue and the woman fears for the safety of her children. She goes to the police who actually help and get her and her children out of that dangerous environment. The church publicly shames her for subverting the church leadership, despite the fact that they were not doing anything. Shortly later, that man is found guilty of child abuse. This is a true story from not that long ago in a very prominent church, and it’s an unfortunately common story.

Feminist theologians have argued that when violence is glorified, when we make a big deal out Jesus’ torture and beating which he bore for the joy that lay before him, we run the risk of this sort of violence being done to others, especially those who have a quieter voice in society and those people bearing it because they are told to be like Christ.

So models of salvation that are centred on violence – Jesus was crucified for us – become untenable. Instead, the salvation of humanity is found elsewhere, such as in the incarnation or Jesus’ ethical and moral life.

Now, I’m not sure I agree, theologically, with distancing these theological ideas from the violence of the cross. But we do need to think carefully about we discuss violence. But also twisting the violence done to Christ in such a way as to justify the continued abuse and oppression of women is horrific and pure blasphemy. Listen to my episode on egalitarianism for how I treat those passages concerning women’s submission.

Other issues include women in church leadership. The last two Isms and Schisms episodes addressed this issue, so go back and have a listen to those episodes on complementarianism and egalitarianism. Many of the verses and interpretations presented in the egalitarianism episode are ones used regularly by feminist scholars.

There’s also the guilt of Adam and Eve. Eve has very often been blamed for eating the forbidden fruit, but some feminist scholars have tried to shift the blame equally between Adam and Eve. After all, the apostle Paul says that sin came through one man, and lays the blame on Adam.

Sex and sexuality has also been a major concern in feminist scholarship. By and large, women’s sexuality has been suppressed throughout a lot of history, where the man’s needs are important but not the woman’s, and it is the wife’s role to satisfy her husband whenever he needs and not the other way round.

Men can get away with being sexually promiscuous, but if a woman behaves similarly, she is condemned. You only need to listen to episodes on the English Reformation to see how this inequality played out in the lives of Henry VIII and his wives.

But in more recent years purity culture has had a considerably damaging impact on women.

Much of this actually goes back to Augustine and a particular application of his doctrine of original sin. Humans, says Augustine, are born sinful and deserving of the wrath of God. We have inherited that guilt from our parents who inherited that guilt from theirs, all the way back to Adam and Eve whose transgression condemned all of humanity. If this condemnation is passed on through childbirth, then the act of sex is shameful.

Within a patriarchal world that became more just the act of sex, but also the physical act of childbirth, so this becomes all the more shameful for the woman than for the man. The ideal woman was one who is entirely naïve and ignorant to sex, the sort of woman the Virgin Mary came to represent, a woman who never experienced sex but gave birth to the saviour. A woman who did not explore her sexuality and was entirely submissive. In Catholic tradition it was believed that Mary remained a virgin for the rest of her life.

Feminist scholarship highlights the significant contributions of female theologians and women throughout history.

We have an early text about the martyrdom of a wealthy woman named Perpetua and her female servant Felicity. Amidst the violence of being thrown before gladiators and wild animals, their faith shines as she challenges standard patriarchal conventions.

There’s Julian of Norwich, Hildegard of Bingen, Anne Hutchinson, Catherine Booth, Catherine of Siena, Theresa of Avila, and Joan of Ark, whose stories I just don’t have time to get into but were significant and influential women.

You might question, why did Jesus come as a man? Well, he had to come as one or the other and in the first century, if he came as a woman he most certainly would not have had a following. No one would have listened to him. If he came today, maybe he’d come as non-binary, I don’t know…but in the first century, it basically had to be male.

Now, you may scoff at the idea of Jesus being non-binary, and, just to clarify, I’m not actually making any particular claims here. But there is the question here of how Jesus represents all of humanity and can sympathise with all of our weaknesses and issues, if he only experienced the male side of life. I don’t actually really have a good answer here, but these are sorts of theological questions that a critical feminist approach can speak into.

Feminism has been primarily concerned with white women or viewing these issues through the lens of a Western white worldview. This was not a deliberate racial thing, it just happened to develop that way. So a new movement emerged out of feminism, called womanism, which was looking at feminism specifically from an African American perspective and comes at it with liberationist or postcolonial influences.

Like feminism, womanism is very diverse, but often highlights black women in the bible and within the history of Christianity. Like Hagar, who was an Egyptian woman, possibly with Nubian descent, a slave who was given to Abraham by his wife Sarah in attempt to have descendants. Her experience is sometimes compared to that of African women who brought across to the Americas during the transatlantic slave trade.

There’s the Pharoah’s daughter who adopts Moses, and Zipporah, Moses’ wife, was from Ethiopia, the Queen of Sheba who visited Solomon, Candace, queen of the Ethiopians is mentioned in Acts, and there are others throughout the text. Womanist theologians also highlight Song of Songs 1.5 which says that black is beautiful, as well as highlighting the fact that, actually, pretty much all of the characters in the bible are not white – there’s the occasional Greek, like the Athenians Paul talked with, and some Romans such as Pilate and his wife, but most, including Jesus, were middle eastern.

When we look at what the bible says about women from a 21^st century lens, we would probably say that it is rather misogynistic. Or at least parts of it. But that’s a way of reading the text, because it wasn’t written for a 21^st century audience. Within its 1^st or 2^nd century context, the New Testament is actually radical in its treatment of women, in elevating women, in affording them genuine human dignity which was rare at the time. To the extent that Jesus recognizes the plight of women and acts to remedy that plight, the New Testament might be considered a feminist text, though again I feel that’s probably anachronistic. Jesus showed particular concern for the oppressed, suppressed, beaten and downtrodden. To truly be Christian, which means to follow and to be like Christ, then we have to have that same concern.

Women’s rights are way better today than they’ve ever been at any other point in history, but there’s still work to be done.

Violence against women is considerable, with a third of women worldwide having experienced some sort of abuse in their life before the age of 15, with a quarter of women in Australia having experienced sexual violence. A woman is killed almost every week by an intimate partner and 15 women are hospitalised every day due to domestic violence. The risk of this violence increases when the woman is pregnant. Women with disability are twice as likely to experience sexual violence, and the rates are even higher in indigenous communities, often at the hands of non-indigenous men, and for LGBTQI+ people.

If you’re one of those men who is currently thinking, but what about all the violence against men? Yes, there is violence against men, lots of it, no one is saying there isn’t. But here’s the thing: It’s not a competition. Plus, violence against men is not normally gender-based, but I do also believe that dealing with these broader issues of sexism and inequality will actually help lower the rates of male violence. Much of that violence comes from being steeped in a chauvinistic, misogynistic, machoistic patriarchal world. Feminism is good for men.

Other issues include pay disparity, and don’t say that’s because women choose to go off and have children; women are punished financially and career wise by raising children. We say things like, “Raising children is the most important job,” and then we don’t pay them. When they’re ready to come back to work, they’ve been out of the workforce for so long that they are perceived as having lost their edge and of course they are considered liabilities because they might get a call at lunch time and have to leave work in the middle of the day to go pick up their child. And so the job goes to the man. Society is built to prioritise men.

Abuse against women within the church is, unfortunately, also really bad. Statistically, there is no difference between Christian families and non-Christian families when it comes to domestic abuse. Women being encouraged to stick it out with an abusive husband and discouraged to seek professional help beyond the church. Those who do take it upon themselves to get out are publicly shamed from the pulpit. The #ChurchToo movement was birthed out of the #MeToo movement where women were sharing their stories of abuse within the church.

And of course when a man doesn’t fit the standard patriarchal ideal of what a man should be is shamed.

Let’s also remember that in large parts of the world, women’s rights are still seriously negligent. Voting rights, education, child marriages, genital mutilation, violence. It was only September of last year, 2022, when Mahsa Amini died in an Iranian hospital after being arrested by the morality police. This prompted large protests, led predominately by women, which the government responded to quite violently, with over 500 casualties.

So I think this is an important topic.

When we do theology and when we read the bible, we should pause to put on the other lenses of perspectives, be that a feminist lens, a womanist lens, a postcolonial lens, or any of the other lenses. One significant way that Christian theologians can help improve the wellbeing of women today is to consider feminist issues in theology, to question how patriarchal values have been built into our churches, into our own worldviews and hermeneutics, and how we think about God, and what we can do to challenge that status quo. And then let our theology guide our action. We should actually do something. We should call out and dismantle systems of abuse and oppression. We should take up the burden of the feminist charge. Why? Because that’s the whole point of Christianity; to follow Christ is to fight for the rights of the oppressed. I’m pretty sure I know where Jesus would be in this.

Women, remember, are just as much the image of God as men. Jesus was the firstborn of all creation, not just of men.

If you are experiencing or know of someone experiencing domestic abuse, reach out and talk to someone or call 1800 RESPECT, 1800 737 732, which is the Australian sexual assault and domestic violence hotline.

Feminist theology is about recognizing that pretty much all of Christian theology and practice has been dictated and developed by men, and offering ways of elevating women’s voices and carving out a platform for women’s issues within that historically male dominated domain of Christian leadership. Only until this is done will the church be able to properly demonstrate who God is in this world.

Historically, when the church has been at its best, it’s been at the forefront of societal change, pushing for the rights of the oppressed, such as women. Nunneries were havens for women fleeing abusive husbands or otherwise tough spots. Christian women were at the front of the Woman’s Suffrage movement, such as the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, Catherine Booth, and Catherine Helen Spence in Australia. At its worst, the church has lamentably suppressed women’s rights and has even been a refuge for abusers.

There’s way more stuff that I have not included in this episode, so I recommend going and reading some feminist literature to get a bigger picture of this topic. But hopefully that’s been a good introduction to feminism and the sorts of issues feminist scholars address.

From a male perspective, this can be quite challenging and even confronting. Men, in general, need to do better. We need to listen to the women in our lives, like seriously listen, and we need to use our privileged platforms and positions of power to advocate for those whose voice is suppressed or ignored. It’s what Jesus did, and so should we.