It was after reading Friedan that it dawned on me that I didn’t know what my favorite color was, let alone more important preferences–and that the reason I didn’t know myself was precisely “the feminine mystique.” Suddenly my resentment at being asked to contribute cookies to the college bake sales–resentment because none of the male professors were asked to do so–no longer seemed to me like selfishness, but rather the result of an unjust paradigm within which I had been trying to live. (A paradigm is what we think we think before we really THINK about it). So it was Betty Friedan, heterosexist as she might have been, who set this lesbian woman free from the first major paradigm she had to resist.Thank you for so perfectly describing the emptiness from which we had to liberate ourselves.

Love, Virginia

Your response to Kimberly’s critique of “The Feminine Mystique” really resonates with me. Although Friedan’s book was not an epiphany for me, as was yours and Nancy’s, I think you are right in all you state about the book’s accomplishments. I’m greatly impressed by your thorough response so full of knowledge and wisdom. Also, I admire Kimberly’s gifts as a writer and appreciate many of the points she makes. I agree with her that Friedan should have stated the audience for whom she was writing. But we must remember that she wrote before authors stated their social “location.” Certainly we don’t find white, middle-class, Western, heterosexual men stating their “location” then, and so many still don’t.

You refer to Second Wave and Third Wave feminists. I know these categories are prevalent in academia and probably in other arenas where people discuss feminism at all. But I’ve always resisted labels and putting things and people into categories, because often that becomes a way of dismissing them. So I’ve felt uneasy when I hear the label “Second Wave feminist,” and especially when I’ve been put into that category. I feel that there is some ageism in this label, that sometimes younger women dismiss us by saying we are “Second Wave feminists,” meaning we are outdated. I’ve heard “Third Wave” feminists criticize Gloria Steinem and Rosemary Radford Ruether for not considering the intersectionality of social injustices, but I think they both have done so, even though in their early writings they didn’t use that term. Also, some “Third Wave” feminists seem to think that we no longer need to be concerned about issues like the ERA or equality for women in religious institutions or inclusive language because the goals on these issues have been accomplished, but they have not been. In fact, many of the goals of “First Wave” feminists, like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, have still not been accomplished. Otherwise, all churches and faith communities would have equal numbers of women and men in leadership, and there would be equal numbers of women and men in Congress.

On the other hand, I know that older feminists have not always welcomed the new perspectives of younger feminists, who have been right in advocating for the integration of social issues, so that we work against sexism, racism, classism, and heterosexism at the same time. I believe that we as feminists can work together on these issues, and that labeling one another as “Second Wave” or “Third Wave” does not help. In fact, sometimes I think the anti-feminists and/or just those invested in the status quo delight in our labeling one another when this leads to discounting any of our concerns and to divisions among us. So instead of using labels, I advocate for all of us to work together on multiple issues. I think the beauty of your 72-27 blog is that it does just that. Also, I admire the way EEWC as a whole brings together women of all generations to work together to contribute to social justice for all women and girls and all people.

Blessings,
Jann

But among conservative Christians, there are many other sources of fear as well. Certainly a perennial source in American history since its invention by John Nelson Darby in the nineteenth century is Dispensationalism. A headline in my local newspaper this morning reads ” Billboards predict the Rapture.”. Well actually the story reveals that the billboards in nine major cities so far did not come up with this on their own but were put up to it by fans of Family Radio. Its founder Harold Camping has declared that for sure Jesus will return on May 21, 2011. His proof for this is Luke 17:26-27, “as it happened in the days of Noah…”. Since the flood began? Covered the earth seven feet deep? Whatever, on May 21, 4990 BCE, exactly 7,000 years ago. And God gave Noah a week’s warning. Thus, Jesus will come next May 21. For sure. They bet that the dazzling precision of the math will discourage people from asking, “Just which geologist has determined that the ‘Flood’ began on May 21, 4990 BCE?”. But stay tuned to the Weather Channel for the next episode of “It Could Happen Tomorrow”!

Thanks for another thoughtfully researched piece! I particularly love the effort at the end to construct new symbols for “doing theology” or interpreting scripture. This was in fact what the first Christians had to do in formulating Trinitarian thought on the full humanity and divinity of Christ. Christ was not just a symbol of the Father – but her actual Son incarnate – a separate being of the same essence. There is a hearty tradition in our faith for thinkers like yourself!

A few issues at stake in your post strike me as (a) the definition of the word feminist – and how it is constantly equated with “issues” (that are not issues but rather people) such as homosexuality, abortion, equal pay for equal work rather than the simple belief in men and women’s inherent equality in the image of God. Even difference feminists would argue that men and women were created uniquely for slightly differentiated purposes. Also at stake is(b)the distrust of hierarchy by many feminist groups because of its pattern of abuse – when in fact – there is most certainly a beloved hierarchy between ourselves and our God! Lastly, (c) any new metaphors we create must always acknowledge how learning is a constant building and/or growing AND deconstructing and/or falling away from the Scriptural interpretations we cling to. In the end, it is God who draws us into the mystery of her love and not ourselves.

Best of luck to Kim! Peace, E