tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971820842270330168.post2341090001714328487..comments2024-01-20T16:28:46.327-08:00Comments on Wordgazer's Words: "Thus, Male Headship" - Christianity and Gender EssentialismKristenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08252374623355509404noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971820842270330168.post-71590839290844755462014-09-29T09:09:38.046-07:002014-09-29T09:09:38.046-07:00What a good article!
Here's another point tha...What a good article!<br /><br />Here's another point that is often missed, and I thought of it when I read the bits from the author who argues that societal trends are based on some kind of gender essentialism, and gives a nod of permission for "some" women and men to go outside them.<br /><br />That's all well and good, but he still hasn't answered the most important question. If it's okay for "some" men and women to go outside of them, then shouldn't we be concerned when society (and the church) makes it difficult for them to do so? For example: Let's say most CEOs are men because men really do tend to possess CEO qualities more than women. But if a woman comes along who happen to have those qualities, but is passed over for being a woman, isn't that still a problem? Even if, say, 98% of women aren't good at being CEOS (whatever that means), there's still 2% of the population that has an unfair uphill battle to be able to use their God-given gifts.<br /><br />So for him to claim that equal opportunity isn't a problem because "most" people aren't wired for the same opportunities, still doesn't touch on the actual issue that many egalitarians worry about: what happens when someone DOES go outside the norm and meets a brick wall?<br /><br />I don't really believe in gender essentialism, by the way. I just wanted to point out that people are still missing the point, even when they try to be generous in their discussions of it.rach.h.davishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14431057906811494573noreply@blogger.com