Marge Simpson, she sure could!

On Saturday Father Orthoduck quoted from Gloria Steinem, when she said:

Pornography is about dominance. Erotica is about mutuality.

On Saturday’s post Father Orthoduck pointed out that she had also commented that:

A woman reading Playboy feels a little like a Jew reading a Nazi manual.

So, how did the feminist movement go from the views of Gloria Steinem to the point that it is now considered a freeing thing that Marge Simpson can pose for Playboy? Well, this is the 20th anniversary of The Simpsons, which is a long run for a televised cartoon series of that type. Marge Simpson is joining a line of actresses a decade or more past their early 20’s who have been strutting their stuff on Playboy. And, feminist thinking has changed.

Most of the early feminist movement was in favor of erotic self-expression. But, as one can see from the Steinem quote about mutuality, it was in the context of a relationship. That is what mutuality implies. That viewpoint has actually crossed over into many of the Christian camps. Recently there has been a spate of reporting on pastors who are advertising preaching series on sex in marriage in a deliberately provocative manner so as to garner a higher attendance to their congregation. While this approach is too spicy, it also reflects an over-reaction rejection of an earlier view held by people, such as The Word of God Community, in which they felt free to speak into the bedroom habits of their married members. Undoubtedly, some rejection of the Word of God approach needed to happen as they tried to define too many facets of the Christian life for their members. They forgot the difference between a monastic community and non-monastic congregation. The result was a massive and ugly blow-up.

Feminism, also, was reacting–and over-reacting–against inappropriate male control of women. Many conservative baby boomers have conveniently forgotten what the situation was like before the feminist movement, in fact before the suffragette movement. Father Orthoduck notices that much of the preaching on marriage and the culture by conservative pastors neglects to mention those inconvenient parts of American history. The reality is that the modern American pastor no longer holds the views that their counterparts held at the beginning of the 20th century, and, even if they held them they would not dare preach them. Let’s review some of the reasons for the build-up of legitimate resentment that led to the volcano of the feminist explosion:

1. It took until 1920 for women to be allowed to vote in every part of the United States. Many conservative preachers supported that stance on the grounds that women were the weaker vessel and could not be trusted to make a truly logical decision.
2. The age of majority is the threshold of adulthood as it is conceptualized (and recognized or declared) in law. It is the chronological moment when a child legally ceases to be considered a minor and assumes control over their persons, actions and decisions, thereby terminating the legal control and legal responsibilities of their parents or guardian over and for them. In most of Europe and the United States, it was not until the late 1800’s that unmarried women were formally given the right of legal majority. Before that, a parent or male relative could and would have at least some control.
3. It took until 1937 for women to have the right to stand for election in Puerto Rico, a commonwealth of the United States.
   
4. During Father Orthoduck’s lifetime there was a time when a man could get a credit card without the co-signature of his wife, but a wife could not get a credit card without the co-signature of her husband, even if she had a job. Neither could she buy a car, or a house, etc., while her husband could, even if she had a job.
5. During Father Orthoduck’s lifetime, it was legal for a woman to be paid less than a man for the same job. That is still a small problem in some areas.
6. During Father Orthoduck’s lifetime, women were not found in the board rooms, it took the force of law to open up top jobs for women

Believe me that Father Orthoduck could go on. And, if baby-boomers who were conservative Christians in the 1960’s would admit it, conservative Christian pastors were preaching against the change in the laws on the grounds of the weakness of the woman. Father Orthoduck can remember sermons being preached forty years ago in which conservative pastors argued that women could be executives provided they were not in charge of the company, as this would violate the rule of no women having charge of men. It is in this context that feminism decides that Christianity is part of the network of cultural and legal constraints that keep women from having their full rights.

And, when the volcano of feminism exploded, it promptly reacted–and over-reacted–against the constraints of everything that was viewed as holding women back. It is in this context that the door was opened to what would later seem to be a partial reversal of the ideals of early feminism. As with the Anabaptist Reformation, as with the reaction against the shepherding movement and their over-control, so did the feminist movement open some doors that led it to unexpected–and not sound–places.

In the case of the Anabaptist Reformation, the Anabaptists have been like Humpty Dumpty. They helped to break the egg, and now have no idea how to put it back together again. And so we have an unending multiplicity of denominations with new ones being born all the time. They expected to return to the Early Church, but instead they destroyed the foundations of the Early Church and left many buildings (congregations) swayed by every wind that comes through. In the case of those who reacted against the shepherding movement, some have ended up adopting purely secular ideas regarding pleasures, etc. And, in the case of feminism . . .

===MORE TO COME===