Thursday, August 22, 2013

Same difference?



So I found myself saying a couple of times recently that I thought the Bible was rather silent on the subject of gender differences. But I have been pondering this, it would be strange if it were true and certainly I have heard gender differences asserted to be biblical many times. So here is my next blog project, to find out if the bible gives any specific instruction or reflection on the nature of 'masculinity' or 'femininity'. And I need your help, particularly if you hold a complementary view of the sexes. 

Here's how this is going to work. If you believe there to be differences in the nature and character of men and women please give those differences one at a time in the comments bellow and feel free to explain your rational if you want. I'll then start a blog for each one with a few of my own thoughts and we can have a discussion about each separately. That might make the conversation more manageable. 

The other thing I wonder is can we do this while leaving aside the question of leadership? - Let's try shall we?

So throw them at me what is the difference between Women and Men?

14 comments:

  1. Sound like an interesting project: I would be interested to see what you say about the biggest obvious difference and that is we are embodied differently and the Bible uses different words for how those things are worked in life. So men become husbands & fathers, women become wives & mothers.

    That to be a father and to be a mother are not identical or interchangeable. So while the Bible might not say men & women in the way we do but it talks of fathers and sons, it talks of mothers and daughters.

    Our bodies give us shape in lots of ways - in what ways do you see that?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Many thanks,

    We are indeed embodied differently. But I am struggling to understand what you are saying is the difference, beyond anatomical between men and women.

    'Fathers are men and Mothers are women' Is what I'm taking from what you've said but I need you to tell me what you think the difference between being a mother and a father is beyond a different name.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think your response highlights what I'm trying to get at - anatomical difference isn't nothing. We live in an age where 'who you really are' is not determined by the body you have. So how do I know my daughter is a girl and not a boy? By what she plays with? What she shows an interest in? How she reacts to stuff? Feminists would mostly be very upset by how transgender (male to female) describe how they 'knew' because it generally reinforces the stereotypes they've been trying to undo.

    I know my daughter is a girl and not a boy because of the body she has. Which means she will become a woman and not a man. A mother and not a father.

    We've named them differently because they are different. What we've lost is 'so what?' What does this physical difference mean?

    So I think our bodies shape our experience of life in lots of ways and matters more than we think. My point is, my wife cannot image to either my son or my daughter what a 'man' should be like. She can tell them, but she can't show them. And vice versa of course.

    So any discussion of differences must begin there and not understate (nor overstate it) because our bodies are the one universal seperator.

    I'm arguing that it means 'something' not 'nothing'. But it's your blog, so the question was - do you think our differing bodies mean anything or nothing to who we are in God, how we experience life, relate to others, maybe even relate to God as a result of the bodies we have?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Phil, thank you very much. Your comments are exactly the question I am asking. There have been a number of blogs on Threads mostly I got caught up in recently that where asking essentially the question as you put it:

      do you think our differing bodies mean anything or nothing to who we are in God, how we experience life, relate to others, maybe even relate to God as a result of the bodies we have?

      Conversations on this subject tend to get rather large and unwieldy, what I am trying to do in this series is deal with things one at a time. So given that you think it means something I'd love it if you could tell me what you think that 'something' is so that we can explore each characteristic one at a time. Many thanks.

      Delete
    2. Ok here's one for starters - strength. With some exceptions it's not an unreasonable statement to say 'men are physically stronger than women'. Misuse of strength puts women regularly and consistently in danger. When women are aggressive or threatening to men it's rarely in a way that is physically overpowering but for men it almost always is. So a negative use of strength results in violence against women.

      Throughout history men have predominately taken on roles that have required their greater strength in the mines, on the battlefield, (opening tricky jam jars, carrying the holiday suitcase ;) etc...) etc...whereas as now machines and technology has opened that up but there are still areas where greater strength has been required and is mostly if not entirely filled by men.

      We still see it in the seperation of sports, so that we see it as a mostly sensible rule that in sports where strength is the key factor (unlike motor racing or horse racing) men and women should compete seperately and not against each other. I touched on that here http://www.thesimplepastor.co.uk/celebrating-difference/

      How I use and don't use my greater physical strength/power is an important issue and one that gets close to the heart of understanding 1 Peter 3:7 right. It's an area, as a direct result of being born male that means that results in an area of discipleship that (most) women never need to consider but (almost) all men do, when turned to sin puts women in great danger, when used right means that men often (at least for most of history) protect and defend women, and should still do so IMHO. So we then reflect differently the image of GOd who is also a protector/defender - of both men and women.

      Thoughts?

      Delete
  4. "Feminists would mostly be very upset by how transgender (male to female) describe how they 'knew' because it generally reinforces the stereotypes they've been trying to undo" GREAT point, Phil! That deserves some further thought!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed this has caused serious debate among feminists.

      Delete
    2. Jenny do you have any links to some of those debates, would be interested in reading a bit more on that. Thanks

      Delete
  5. How about Genesis 3: "Your desire will be for your husband..." Men aren't told the same. (They're told 'he will rule over you', but you wanted to avoid leadership...!) Our desire for love is different to men's

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It may become unavoidable to go over this but I'm going to put it on hold for the moment though Rachel Held Evans is doing a big series on submission starting next week so worth checking that out. http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/submission-series-announcement

      Delete
  6. And another - women have a need to feel beautiful. Much of our self-worth is bound up in our looks, and that's one way in which we judge ourselves against others. Men do to a certain extent, but the drive is different. At the base level, men find value in being 'the strongest' while women find value in being 'the prettiest'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you will get onto this.

      Delete
    2. If you wanted to write a blog about why you think this is the case I'll put a link up to it.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Jenny - been away and only just seen your reply. I'll write something and let you know.

      Delete