THE FEMINISTIC FACE OF HUMANISM
Robert L. Waggoner[1]
Most Christians know that
feminism is an influential modern point of view. However, if they were asked,
most Christians would probably not be able to discuss intelligently the beliefs
and ideals of feminism. If Christians effectively engage this modern
philosophical enemy of Christianity, then Christians would do well to
understand its history, philosophy, its contradiction to biblical perspectives,
and its opposition to social science findings. Christians should also
comprehend the objectives of feminism, the implications the acceptance of
feminism would have to society, how feminists fight their battles in the
political arena, and also how Christians must respond to the threats posed by
feminism in modern times.
History of Feminism
Feminism is historically an
outgrowth of women’s quest for equal rights and is philosophically associated
with modern humanism. In America the quest for equal rights of women
historically falls into two periods. The first began about the time of the
American Revolutionary War and continued until women secured the right to vote
in 1920. The second is from then until the present.
Both the American Revolution
and the War Between the States gave impetus and strength to women’s fight for
equal rights. The American Revolution was concerned with independence from
British tyranny, while the Civil War was concerned with freedom of blacks from
slavery. In both these causes women saw themselves also needing to be freed
from the tyranny of some of their circumstances. They wanted certain rights
that were then denied to them. They sought the right to equal education, the
right to own property, the right to speak publicly, the right to spend their
own money, the right to a professional career, and the right to vote.
While there was some
agitation for these rights before the Civil War, it was not until after that
war that crusades for women’s rights really got started. By 1920 women had
secured most of the rights they sought, including the right to vote which came
with passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Most women
were then satisfied, and the quest for women’s rights almost disappeared. The
rights for which women fought during this first period are rights with which
almost everyone now agrees are legitimate.
For the next three decades
there was a lull in feminism, but it began to grow again after World War II
when increasingly large numbers of women began entering the work force and the
philosophy of humanism acquired rising influence. The growth of feminism was
given special impetus in 1963 by the publication of Betty Friedan’s book, The Feminist Mystique. “The book
convinced thousands of women that they were ‘unfulfilled’ in the home,
exploited by their husbands, and treated as slaves by their children. This book
had a profound impact on the attitudes of some women and made them vulnerable
to the assault on their minds that was to come through the literature of the
60’s and 70’s. This literature prepared them to be sucked into the agitation
for ‘women’s rights’ and for the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment which
came disguised as a struggle for ‘equal pay for equal work’ (even though the
Equal Pay Act passed Congress in 1963).”[2]
In 1972, while feminism was
riding its crest of popularity, the Equal Rights Amendment passed in both
houses of Congress and was ratified by thirty of the fifty states. Only then
were there serious questions raised about it that brought its expected
Constitutional Amendment to a halt.
Although that amendment died
politically in 1982, and feminism began to wane, feminist forces are still
exceedingly strong in our society. They are now seeking to achieve piecemeal
what they could not accomplish before in one fell swoop with the Equal Rights
Amendment.
Feminism has nothing
whatsoever to do with being “feminine,” that is, possessing qualities which are
natural to womanhood. Since World War II, feminism has been a philosophy which,
for all practical purposes, may be considered the same thing as the “Women’s
Liberation Movement.” The largest and most influential feminist political
organization is the “National Organization for Women” (NOW), founded in 1965 by
Betty Friedan.
Philosophy of Humanism
As a philosophy, feminism is
an outgrowth of, closely allied with, and supportive of humanism. That is,
feminism is an application of the precepts of humanism specifically to women as
a class of people.
Although feminism is
generally consistent with humanism, feminism actually gives priority to females
rather than to males. Whereas in humanism mankind is believed to be the measure
of all things, in feminism woman is believed to be the measure of all things.
Whereas in humanism man makes himself God, in feminism woman makes herself God.
Whereas in humanism mankind rejects the authority of God and Christ, in
feminism woman rejects also the authority of man.
A substantial number of
founders of the Women’s Liberation Movement were themselves humanists,
socialists, or Marxists. These include Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, and
Margaret Mead. In fact, Betty Friedan, “the mother of the Women’s Liberation
Movement”, was a signer of Humanist
Manifesto II, and co-recipient of the “Humanist of the Year” award in 1975.[3]
Close observers of feminism know that a central thrust of women’s liberation is
to promote humanistic values.”[4]
For example, Warren Farrell, of the National Organization for Women, is quoted
in the June 25, 1972 New York Sunday News
as saying, “Ultimately, this is a humanistic movement.”[5]
Feminism is the belief that
women have equal rights with men in all things. It is also the belief that
natural differences do not exist in either the authority or in the sexual roles
of men and women. Feminism is therefore primarily concerned with equality,
authority, and gender roles. These beliefs are set forth in Humanist Manifesto II.[6]
Because feminism is
basically a humanistic philosophy and world view, it must be understood in
terms of humanistic ideals. From feminism’s primary concerns about equal
rights, authority, and sexual roles of men and women flow a significant number
of social, political, moral, ethical, religious, and economic issues of
importance to individuals, families, churches, and the nation.
Feminism Is Contradicted by
The Bible
In order to understand the
fallacies of feminism, we must first determine whether women do, in fact, have
equal rights with men. If not, what rights do men have which women do not? Are
there natural differences in the sexual roles of men and women? If so, what are
those differences? For Christians, the only way to determine the rights and
responsibilities of men and women is to examine Scripture. While feminists and
humanists will reject God’s word as a standard of authority, Christians must
begin there, and then demonstrate the consistency of God’s word with natural
characteristics of men and women.
Both men and women were
equally created in the image of God (Genesis 1:17). Both men and women are
equally worthy of eternal salvation (Galatians 3:28). And both men and women
are equally cared for by God as “heirs together of the grace of life” (I Peter
3:7). The Bible makes no distinction between men and women regarding their
personal worth.
However, scripture declares
that in the matters of authority and leadership men and women are not equal. God is the head of Christ,
Christ is the head of man, and man is the head of woman (1 Corinthians 11:3). A
woman is not to exercise dominion or authority over a man (1 Timothy 2:10- 11).
Two reasons are given why men have authority over women. First, “it was Adam
who was first created, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:12). Although man originated from
God, woman originated from man (1 Corinthians 11:8-9.). Second, “it was not
Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression”
(1 Timothy 3:14; See also Genesis 3:6; 2 Corinthians 11:3).
More specifically, Scripture
declares that in marriage “the husband is head of the wife” (Ephesians 5:23).
That this was God’s intent from the beginning is evident because the woman was
created to be a “helper” for man (Genesis 2:18). When Eve sinned, God told her,
“your desire shall be for your husband.” By that he probably meant not her
sexual desire, (for that would have been a part of the original creation), but
her desire to rule over her husband. However, God specifically said, “he shall
rule over you” (Genesis 3:16).
Moreover, in the assembly,
(i.e. church), women are to learn in silence (1 Corinthians 11:34-35). It is
men, not women, who are instructed in every place to lift up holy hands in
prayer (1 Timothy 2:8). Rulership over the church belongs to men, those who are
“husbands” (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6). A ruler in the church must be one who
“rules well his own household” (1
Timothy 3:4), God gave the roles of authority and leadership to men over women.
He did not give those roles to women
over men.
Not only does the Bible make
distinctions regarding the authority of men and women, but it also
distinguishes between the gender roles of men and women. The primary role of
man before sin entered into the world was to “keep” the Garden of Eden (Genesis
2:15). The role of woman was defined as a “helper” (Genesis 2:18). After sin
entered the world, the role of woman was declared to be that of bringing forth
children (Genesis 3:16), while the role of man is to “toil” the ground (Genesis
3:17) in “the sweat of your face” (Genesis 3:19). Thereafter, the occupations
of men are declared. For example, Cain was a “tiller of the ground” and Abel
was a “keeper of sheep” (Genesis 4:1). No occupations are mentioned of women.
In fact, their names are not even given in the genealogical lists except in
rare cases. It is assumed the role of women was that of helping their husbands
and raising their children.
In both the Old and New
Testaments the husband and father is considered the primary provider (1 Timothy
5:8) and teacher (Ephesians 6:4) in the home. The role of the wife and mother
is that of assistant to her husband in home and family duties. The Bible
declares that young married women should love their husbands, love their
children, keep house, and give the
enemy no occasion for reproach (1 Timothy 5:14). While the Bible does recognize
that unmarried women may be gainfully employed, (for example; Lydia was a
seller of purple, Acts 16:14-15) such cases do not in fact contradict the
normal and distinct sexual roles God intended for men and women.[7]
Feminism Is Opposed By
Social Science Findings
The inequality of men and
women in matters of authority and sexual roles may also be demonstrated as a
natural fact through findings of anthropologists and sociologists who have
examined many cultures of the ancient and modern world. Regarding authority and
power, one scholar “examined most of the anthropological and sociological
literature on the subject of political leadership and authority. In particular
he scrutinized every report of an alleged matriarchy, where women were said to
hold political power. He found no evidence that a matriarchy had ever existed
or is in any way emerging today. He found no society in which authority was
associated chiefly with women in male-female relations. In a review, Margaret
Mead agreed with these findings and described his presentation of the data as
‘faultless.’ The degree to which women take power seems to depend on the extent
to which men are absent. George Murdock compared some 500 cultures and found
that, in all of them, fighting and leadership were associated with men.”[8]
Regarding the male role as provider in marriage, “Margaret Mead maintained, ‘in
every known human society (men are) to provide for women and children.’ In
order to marry, in fact, Malinowski says that almost every human society first
requires the man ‘to prove his capacity to maintain the woman.’”[9]
It is therefore evident, not only to Bible believers, but also to non-biblical
scholars, that there are profound and significant biological differences
between the sexes which are then translated in sexual inequalities in all
societies. Whenever a society pretends there are no differences or inequalities
between the sexes – then that society begins to disintegrate.
Objectives of Feminism
The basic unit of all
societies has been the nuclear family wherein husbands and wives, fathers and
mothers, have had different gender roles. The continuation of a society demands
that children understand those gender roles from their parents and follow the
role of their particular gender. However, feminism (and humanism) declares that
the basic unit of society should not be the nuclear family, but the autonomous
individual. Humanism specifically declares that “the principle of moral equality must be furthered through the
elimination of all discrimination based upon . . . sex, age. . . . We believe
in equal rights for both women and men to fulfill their unique careers and
potentialities as they see fit, free of invidious discrimination.”[10]
This means that, by its very
nature, feminism is an attack against the family. Feminist are very explicit
about this. Their objective is to destroy the patriarchal marriage institution.
“The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the
liberation of women. Therefore, it is important for us to encourage women to
leave their husbands and not to live individually with men.”[11]
“The nuclear family must be replaced with a new form of family . . .”[12]
Feminism is intent upon restructuring not only the family, but also other basic
institutions of society, namely, the church and civil governments. Feminism now
“rests on the belief that it is up to women . . . to build a Feminist-Socialist
Revolution.”[13]
Because Feminists believe
that women, as a class, are oppressed by men, then to break such tyranny “it is
necessary to establish a socialist order based on two premises: 1. The economic
independence of women from men. 2. The elevation of ‘women’s work’ to the highest
status, making the primary function of the society that of meeting the basic
human needs of all the people.”[14]
Feminism is now trying to force its beliefs upon our whole society. Notice how
the basic beliefs of feminism would be translated into practical matters
regarding the family. Since feminism believes that men and women are equal in
all gender roles, then it must also contend that women are as naturally endowed
as men for careers in providing for their families, and also that men are as
equally capable as women in the mothering of children.
Moreover, since feminism
believes that men and women should have equal rights, then homosexual and
lesbian marriages must be equally acceptable as are heterosexual marriages, and
also that communal marriages are equally as acceptable as are those of couples.
Like humanism, feminism requires easy access to divorce. Because feminism
contends that women must have control over the reproductive function of their
own bodies, it also contends women must have safe and effective birth control
and access to free, legal, and safe abortions. Regarding the raising of
children, feminists “support parent controlled child care centers as a
necessary step toward the feminist-socialist revolution, but our vision of the
upbringing of children extends beyond them. With the destruction of the nuclear
family must come a new way of looking at children. They must be seen as the
responsibility of an entire society rather than individual parents.”[15]
Tactics Used By Feminists In
The Political Arena
In order to obtain these
goals, feminists are extremely active in the political arena, bureaucracies of
civil governments, influential social service agencies, and in the schools.
Christians are generally repulsed by homosexuals and lesbians and react with
some disgust to abortion and other feminist objectives. However, many
Christians, being unaware of basic feministic beliefs and goals, often appear
to be easily led into the feminist camp. Feminists use noble sounding causes
such as “Parental Leave,” “Comparable Worth,” “Unisex Insurance,” and other
like attempts to push feministic ideals upon society through economic laws and
political policies that are then enforced by civil governments.
Feminists want to get more
women into the work force. In order for working mothers of pre-school children
to have child care services, feminists also lobby for government subsidized day
care centers. (Admittedly, if mothers of pre-schoolers must work, they need
someone to care for their children). However, a major reason why mothers of
pre-schoolers cannot stay home and care for their own children is because
humanism has created an economic environment which often makes mothers
participants in feministic objectives either unconsciously or against their own
wills.
During the 1970’s about a
third of the states passed “no-fault” divorce laws while most other states
allowed divorce on such grounds as “irreconcilable differences” which
translates into essentially the same thing as no-fault divorce laws. (All this
was in keeping with the philosophy of feminism). With these easy divorce laws
came diminishing economic responsibilities of former husbands for alimony and
child support. Large numbers of divorced mothers with pre-school children
therefore now find themselves in financial straits and must either work outside
the home or be on government welfare programs.
For families remaining
intact, real family income was also declining. A combination of economic
factors meant that “in the current generation of two-earner couples with
children, both spouses together now have less real income than their fathers
had as a single wage earner (while their mothers were full-time homemakers).
The current generation of parents is working longer hours for less real income
and much less family life than their parents had.”[16]
What was this combination of economic circumstances? It includes “especially
the inflation that started with the 1973 oil embargo and reached double-digit
under Jimmy Carter, and the steep increase in taxes that resulted from bracket
creep and the doubling of Social Security taxes. A third major factor which
exceeded the demand for workers and made it unnecessary to offer higher wages.
This large labor supply was created both by the large number of baby boomers
and by the flooding of millions of women into the job market.”[17]
Add to that the facts that housing costs were escalating drastically, and that
the costs of energy for both homes and automobiles rose more than fifty
percent. In short, because politics have given endorsement to humanistic ideals
in economic matters, then feminism has been able to promote many of its social
objectives in spite of having lost its major push for the Equal Rights
Amendment.
Now the question is, What
should Christians do to win the war against feminism? Two responses seem
appropriate. One is instructional, the other is political. Both must be done at
the same time. First, Christians must insist that the basic unit of society is
the nuclear family of a husband and his wife and their natural and/or adopted
children. Christians must teach about the sanctity of marriage, the
responsibilities of fathers, the importance of mothers, and authority of
parents. And this teaching must be presented not only to those who assemble
with the saints for worship, but also to the non-Christian community.
Second, Christian citizens
must promote state and national legislation consistent with and supportive of
biblical teachings regarding the family. Legally, divorce should not be easily
acquired. Husbands and fathers should be held legally accountable for economic
provisions for their families. Wives and mothers should have child care
priorities over employment outside their homes. And parents must be given back
legal authority over their own children which civil governments have all to
frequently taken from them.
Christians must be the light
of the world, the salt of the earth, and a leavening influence upon the world.
Because Christians have too frequently failed in these responsibilities,
feminism has grown and been able to win many victories in the political arena.
Many people of strong Christian convictions are now awakening to the reality of
what has happened and are now beginning to meet their philosophical enemies in
the political arena to do battle. Whenever enough Christians are knowledgeable
of the nature of the conflict, whenever enough Christians possess the will to
engage the enemy in battle, then, with God’s help, will Christians be
victorious over feminism and other humanistic philosophies. Then Christian
homes in America will become much stronger.
[1]Copyright © by Robert L.
Waggoner, 1988, Revised, 2000. Permission is granted to reproduce and
distribute this material without alteration for non-commercial educational
purposes whenever copyright and authorship is indicated. All other rights
reserved.
[2]John and Irene Conlan, Beyond 1984. (Scottsdale, AZ:
FaithAmerica Press, Inc. n. d.), 37.
[3]This award is given each
year by the American Humanist Association “to one of its members who has
achieved distinction in some field of endeavor relevant to the philosophy and
purpose of humanism.” The Humanist,
March/April. 1958, 108, via Claire Chambers. The SIECUS Circle: A Humanist Revolution. (Belmont, Mass.: Western
Islands. 1977),59.
[4]Claire Chambers. The SIECUS Circle, 78, 79.
[5]Claire Chambers. The SIECUS Circle, 80.
[6]These statements from Humanist Manifesto II document the
beliefs of feminism. “In various societies, the demands of women and minority
groups for equal rights effectively challenge our generation” (Preface, Humanist Manifesto II). “The right to
birth control, abortion and divorce should be recognized. While we do not
approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we
wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting
adults . . . individuals should be permitted to express their sexual
proclivities and pursue their life-styles as they desire” (Humanist Manifesto II, Sixth). “We are critical of sexual
chauvinism - male or female. We believe in equal rights for both women and men
to fulfill their unique careers and potentialities as they see fit, free of
invidious discrimination” (Humanist
Manifeto II, Eleventh).
[7]For an analysis of New
Testament perspectives of the roles of women, read Neil R. Lightfoot, The Role of Women: New Testament
Perspectives. (Memphis: Mercury Printing Co. 1978).
[8]George Gilder, Men And Marriage. (Gretna, LA: Pelican
Publishing Company. 1986), 21, ref. to Steven Goldberg. The Inevitability of Patriarchy. (New York: Morrow, 1973), and
quoting Margaret Mead, Redbook, Oct.
1973, and George Murdock, “World Ethnographic Sample,” American Anthropologist 59 (1957).
[9]George Gilder, Men And Marriage, p. 15, quoting
Margaret Mead, Male and Female: A Study
of The Sexes in a Changing World. (New York: Morrow, 1949) quoted from the
paperback (New York: Dell, 1968), p. 195, and also Robert Briffault and
Bronislaw Malinowski, Marriage: Past and
Present. (Boston: Porter Sargent, 1956), 79.
[10]Humanist Manifesto II, Eleventh.
[11]Karen Clark, Sandy Gerber,
Nancy Lehmann, Susan Miller, and Hellen Sullinger. The Document: Declaration of Feminism. 1971, 11, 12.
[12]Same source, 13.
[13]Karen Clark, et. al. The Document: Declaration of
Feminism. 2.
[14]Same source, 5.
[15]Same source, 14.
[16]Phyllis Schlafly. The Phyllis Schlafly Report, (Box 618,
Alton , IL 62002), Vol. 20, No. 5, Sec. 1, Dec., 1986. 2.
[17]Same source, 3.