The Curse of Patriarchy
Recently, I started a group through the Bridge Christian Church, where I co-pastor not support pastor, but labor, build, struggle, birth, and create to live alongside each other trying to figure out what the hell it means to be the body of Christ.
This group is not exclusively for the Bridge, it’s for anyone that identifies as a women, thus enduring what all women endure, in the church and in our culture. How that has and is affecting us as women, mothers, daughters, sisters, wives and singles? We also explore how this has and is effecting men, fathers, sons, brothers, husbands and singles? You may be thinking; Why should I care? I’ve gotten what I want, I’m a pastor, I get to work where very few women in our society will ever be allowed to work. I care because I want more for my daughter and my son than complementarianism and second best. I want them to someday step from the relative safety of our home and know that they both can do whatever they want! That my son is better and more than the “eventual head of some household”, where he will have to make ALL THE DECISIONS ALONE and be pandered to.
Martha Peace advises, “The godly wife must also suppress selfish desires (for romance, a career, an equitable marriage), practice addressing her spouse in soothing tones” (http://www.motherjones.com/media/2009/03/books-purpose-driven-wife)
I want him to know that he has the right to a partnership where the equality is shared, not hoarded, he is not a child that needs to be spoken to in soothing tones. That he can be a compassionate, emotional, empathizing male. And that does not make him less.
That my daughter is equal to any man and any man who asks her to be less than she is, is not a man. That there is more for her life than silence and submission (and in fact submission isn’t what the church has made it out to be).
Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise. (Galatians 3: 23-29)
We are our world’s best hope, living out a transformed life! Not being silent when we see injustice. Owning our part and being part of the solution.
Discuss - 4 Comments
[...] here: The Curse of Patriarchy | The Bridge Christian Church of Portland … Posted in Church Tags: bridge, christian-church, church, co-pastor-not, figure-out, [...]
Hi Angie,
I’ve responded to your blog post with a lengthy two-part blog post of my own:
On Men, Women, Feminism and the elusive “Patriarchy” hobgoblin. (Part 1)
http://kevin-wayne.blogspot.com/2012/09/on-men-women-feminism-and-elusive.html
On Men, Women, Feminism and the elusive “Patriarchy” hobgoblin. (Part 1)
http://kevin-wayne.blogspot.com/2012/09/on-men-women-feminism-and-elusive_20.html
I’ve also linked to three essays written by Marxists authors critical of Feminist Patriarchy:
http://kevin-wayne.blogspot.com/2012/09/marxists-write-against-feminist.html
Unfortunately, “Patriarchy” is a loaded word that carries with it a lot of common misconceptions about history and is negligent to the degree that it tells only one side of the story for buttressing a political agenda. Plus I think it misses the nature and shape of the history of oppression by a mile.
For anyone who reads what I’ve written, there’s a lot of info that takes a lot of time to absorb. So to those who would engage me, I would appreciate due diligence as such. I’ve posted five “Thesis Statements” near the beginning of Part 1, so that it’s clear what I’m trying to get across.
But we’ll see if The Bridge really does accept everyone’s perspective after this.
Ciao for now~!
Kevin Wayne
Thanks for posting your thoughts, Kevin, although I believe your blog is disrespectful and presented in a reactionary format, rather than a format seeking to be understood/to understand. You sound like you are looking for a fight. That is not something I’m willing to give you.
I actually read through your posts and took heed to watch and listen to everything (so, at the very least, I am a credible responder to your voice, per your own POV). A few thoughts on what I read and what I am “hearing” from you:
I wish you would have sought to understand Angie, rather than reacting to a female pastor, in leadership. What I am seeing from you, is something Angie said regarding Patriarchy and the church triggering a deep and lengthy reaction to one of Angie’s posts and to the patriarchy group when really, what you are responding to is your deep hurt at the hands of a woman (based on the statement from your blog posted below) and for that, I am truly sorry. I am sorry you were hurt so badly by a woman.
“As such, I gotta say this: I’m not too keen on an exclusive cabal being held in the church where young girls and women are being told that the reasons for their failures in life are because we men are conspiring to keep them out of certain aspects of the job market, Not when myself and most of the male friends of mine have experienced assault and abuse – mental and even physical – at the hands of a woman And some of us still bear the scars of it to this day. Some of us are even on disability and taking medication for it.”
In defense of the Patriarchy group at The Bridge, every time it was announced, Angie made it VERY clear this was not a man-hater club, but a safe place to discuss Patriarchy in the church and the hurt caused to women throughout history due to a vastly patriarchal society and to help the healing process and be educated about oppression of women (not to say oppression did not and does not happen to other groups). As someone who attended the group, it was just that-a discussion of women throughout history who made a difference and how we could make a difference. It is saddening to know you felt threatened by such a group and instead of seeking to further understand or gain clarification, reacted. Yes, the group was for anyone identifying as female; however, as someone who has attended The Bridge off and on as you have, you know very well, we would and do say things to each other in person (“Makes me tend to think that you are going to say something about me that you wouldn’t normally say to my face”).
If you had sought to understand, rather than react, your voice/concerns would have been heard and you would have also understood the lens from which Angie, this group and the majority of men at The Bridge, view the world, men and women. We love men. We love women. We see that Patriarchy and inequality hurts both men and women.
I have many thoughts regarding your posts with regard to “everything women have has been given to them by a man” and voting and such, but would much rather talk to you in person, than via text conversation.
For the record, there were also people in slavery that did not want to be free…just like the women who were anti-suffrage. Does that make slavery ok?
Kevin, over all, I think your posts, while organized and thought-out, were actually disrespectful and spiteful. In saying that, I would like to seek to understand YOU better, so if you are up for a cup of coffee or whatever, please let me know.
Postscript: One other point, since you brought up the issue of slavery. I don’t have the historical references handy, but I could hunt them down if you like. Among slaves there was actually a division not so much on whether or not to be freed, but *how* that should be accomplished. One idea that was kicked around was that the US Government actually purchase their freedom, and coupled with this was a “back to Africa” sort of movement (by Marcus Garvey? Not sure of the time frame.) In any case, to my understanding there was initially support among slaves for this solution, but when the move back to the motherland lost steam, so did the movement to buy their freedom.
There were in fact countries that ended slavery this way, and as such avoided war. Why would that be not a better solution? But this is in keeping with what I’m saying: It’s a bit hard for a 3rd party to know which way to jump until it’s clear who’s representing the people group’s grievances in question.
I do not know of an organized effort by African slaves to remain in slavery, perhaps you do?
Just some thoughts.