“Take a Wild Guess…”

Who said the following:


“There are two separate arenas of life of a nation: that of men and that of women.  A woman’s Nature has rightly ordained that men head the family and are burdened with the task of protecting their people, the community.  The world of the woman, when she is fortunate, is her family, her husband, her children, her home.”


A)    Billy Graham

B)    John MacArthur

C)    Kay Arthur

D)    Adolf Hitler


The correct answer is D, Adolf Hitler.  Taken from a 1936 women’s rally in Nuremburg, from the official party proceedings, “Die Tagung der deutschen Frauenschaft.”


Does Herr Hitler’s perspective sound that *foreign* to what we hear on the topic from other venues today? 



Examples?  For just a few, check out:








Helen B. Andelin’s Fascinating Womanhood (Pacific Press, 1965) offered a look at “femininity” that’s not all that different from Nuremburg: A woman should not invade a man’s “natural sphere” or try to excel him in anything that requires his masculine ability.  Instead she should recognize her husband’s superior strength and ability and focus her sights on becoming a domestic goddess.   




Check out the manner in which Christian women who differ with or question these views are regarded.  They’re often viewed with suspicion and distrust.  They’re tagged “unsubmissive,” “harsh”, “domineering,” “bi**hy,” “women’s libber” or the omnipresent cheap shot when no other label comes to mind – “unbiblical” – and treated like the main course at a cannibal feast.




Another question:


Speaking of “women’s ministries,” which is it that so much of W.M. so often focuses on one demographic: moms with kids?  Is motherhood or wifedom what defines us as Christian women?  (If it does, then what about teens, widows, or single women?  Are they somehow “less” Christian or feminine than the former?  Why?)


Why do some Christian women spend so much time and energy convincing themselves that they’re not like and shouldn’t buy into the views, values, or priorities of The World, that they wind up looking like cardboard cut-outs themselves?  Why do some “Christian women” march lock-step in single file, exchanging the feminine mystique for “biblical womanhood” mantras defined by a June Cleaver paradigm?  It’s as if “Christian womanhood” is defined by a false dichotomy: being un, non, or anti-feminist (whatever that means) = biblical womanhood?  Huh?  



While we’re on this topic, why is it that in some circles, the more dowdy and docile a woman appears, the more “biblical” or “feminine” she is?






  “Christian women” resist being crammed into The World’s one-size-fits-all version of womanhood, but we’re not always sure what the usual one-size-fits-none version of Christian womanhood looks like, either.  Or do we?  No wonder so many of the items on the “women’s ministries” menu are so…. Boring…  Predictable…  Dull. 




I’ve been thinking about this and related subjects for some time.  I’ve reached a conclusion: I don’t know.  But some ideas are beginning to form.  Stay tuned.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: