We are writing a series on Beauty. This is the last planned post of the series. I alluded in the last post to two problems – one being our self-perception that we are ugly in part because of the world’s fixation on a certain outward standard for women, rather than a focus on the divine truth that we are all in God’s image and He delights in us. I wrote about that in Beauty #4. Recently I stumbled on a blurb about a documentary coming out about standards of beauty in the movie industry, which make many women think “nothing fits.” (https://variety.com/2023/film/news/nothing-fits-doc-beauty-geena-davis-institute-1235686915/?fbclid=IwAR3roOWW8MxYgMjj0thfiV6JAG-9yMcGm_hQhafywWA9VfS8mVGtLBR86Cs) I’m looking forward to seeing that! (Since I haven’t watched this, it is not an endorsement of the content.)
Today’s subject is the second problem – what it means to be a woman, expectations for how women should be and the narrow band of acceptable appearances, personality and behavior. This happens in all cultures in varied ways, but I have also experienced this in the Christian world personally.
First, why do we have to be beautiful at all? I wish I could find the NYTimes article I read years ago about how today’s college women feel pressure to succeed academically and look “hot!” Is that required of women? I just saw the Barbie movie and evidently women still feel this pressure. There is a long important monologue by Gloria (a mother living in the real world, not Barbieland) telling all the impossible expectations placed on women, which run the gamut from her appearance to her personality to her accomplishments. One question that arises is whether this demand for beauty and all these other things comes from men or comes from ourselves or some of both. I think if we are honest, we will admit that it is not all being imposed upon us by men. It has multiple sources, and certainly men constitute one source. I remember men in my college days evaluating the women in the “swimsuit” edition of Sports Illustrated, women who were by my assessment all beautiful, but one man in particular felt free to rate their bodies by their attractiveness to him! We women can be just as brutal in evaluating ourselves and other women. My first two posts on Beauty dealt with the evil of having this superficial vision of the worth of any human being. This is not how the Lord looks upon us.
Even so, in the Christian world, I have intuited a Christian version of this pressure, that a Christian woman should look a certain way and display an interior beauty. The most reliable display is to be soft-spoken and femininely dressed. If you know me personally, you know I have never been soft-spoken! Many of the women students and alumni I know have also felt constrained as Christian women to an expected personality – soft-spoken and sweet. Also, if you know me well, you know part of me yearns for my days back in the army, wearing fatigues and army boots, hair clipped up and minimal jewelry. Christian culture has become more flexible than it was in my youth and early adulthood. Nevertheless, young women in the church today still feel these pressures to look and behave a certain way.
Where do we get this impression? One biblical passage that might give this impression is 1 Peter 3:1-6, about which I have written before. The passage makes reference to winning disobedient husbands over “without a word,” “by…respectful and pure conduct,” with an “imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit,” which emulates the “holy women who hoped in God” of the Old Testament. Interestingly, Peter steers these wives away from using their outward beauty to influence these husbands.
I want to clarify that “without word” or focusing more on deeds than speech to influence disobedient husbands is a ”contingency plan,” since these husbands are perhaps less receptive to the wise words of their wives than are godly husbands. Speech and deeds are both means by which wives help and advise God-fearing husbands. The most useful speech and deeds are definitely careful, gentle and honoring to God, and I want to add that they are characteristic of the lifestyle of every Christian, whether male or female. The Proverbs tell us in a very gender neutral way that “gentle words turn away wrath.” But the Proverbs also tell us that rebuking a wise man will make him wiser, but that a fool will hate rebuke. And thus Peter steers these wives away from rebuke or much verbal input toward the contingency plan of actions. As a child, I was always taught that actions speak louder than words. Like Paul in Ephesians 5:22-33, Peter is telling these wives to conduct themselves in submission, respect, gentleness towards their husbands, reverence and obedience to the Lord, and with the modification of caution to speak less and let their actions do the talking.
Though he is giving this instruction to wives, he has also given essentially this same instruction already to slaves and citizens. He has also drawn an example from Jesus’ behavior before the unjust authorities who handed him over to death. So not only is this a contingency plan for otherwise talkative, helpful, wise wives, but it is prescribed as a good plan for any Christian who might be under an unjust or volatile authority.
We must also utilize the whole Bible to give us further role models for godly women. Peter’s example of godliness is Sarah, who did in fact submit in enormous life decisions, but was able to take initiative to influence Abraham in both positive and negative choices. Likewise Rebecca, Rachel and Leah showed initiative. I could keep chronicling acts of bravery, initiative and leadership through the historical books of the Bible. One very positive example that stands out to me was Abigail in 1 Samuel 25, who defies her husband’s foolish decision to be inhospitable to David and his fighting men, and then appeals to David not to retaliate. She was coupling wise diplomatic words with actions of bravery, and it is clear that God approved, not just David.
The biblical material then doesn’t jive with the stereotypes we espouse. Our own experience doesn’t fully line up with these stereotypes either, but the stereotypes still have been taught. One popular Christian woman of the past was Elisabeth Elliot, who essentially believed that it was in men’s hardwired natures to initiate and in women’s hardwired natures to respond. I once was privileged to meet Elliot in person, and my distinct impression was that she was a woman hardwired to initiate and lead, every bit as much as she was also a godly responder. I see in the Scriptures that men and women initiate and respond. I have always thought that about myself. I take initiative naturally, when I have an idea. I also respond to the ideas of others receptively. And I observe many godly men, my husband included, who do both of these things with joy to both lead and respond to the leadership of others. The stereotypes can often make all of us feel deficient within our gender – am I some kind of defective “high-testosterone” woman because I naturally take initiative? And conversely, is a man deficient when he isn’t a natural born initiator? I have heard people say that a girl can get away with being a “tom-boy” more easily than a boy can overcome the criticism that he is effeminate. This is a post about the constraining Christian stereotypes about women, but it is important to note the reverse stereotypes are also deeply destabilizing for men. These stereotypes are shallow by nature. Not only do men and women NOT correspond uniformly to them, but equating loud initiative with good leadership is also erroneous. Strong, godly leaders are often described in the New Testament as gentle and lowly, like our Savior himself. (1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9)
The exhortation to us all might be to realize that our varied personalities must all be constrained by the commandments of God, many of which are gender-neutral. And to some degree also as women, our personalities might need to be constrained occasionally by our roles. We hate constraints, and we are hearing from our culture that we must be “authentic.” My natural bent to initiate if no one else is doing so, to initiate when I have an idea and care deeply about something, may need to be constrained to make room for my more naturally soft-spoken but very wise husband to lead, not all the time but sometimes. And if it were reversed and he was comfortably outspoken like I am and I was comfortable going with the flow, he might have to constrain himself to make room for me to express my submerged opinions. There is no exact balance. But if it looks to my children like I am in charge, maybe I should quietly wait to speak up. I should do this not only for the optics but for the real fostering of collaboration in the family, the Body of Christ and society.
If “authenticity” is our goal (doing what arises out of our nature, albeit sinful) and gender stereotypes are generally worldly, agreed upon and enforced, we will have a great many people who feel hopelessly outside the lines. But if we accept that our personalities need constraints from God, see that the Scriptures present a far less rigid idea of what is stereotypically feminine or masculine, and know that He will powerfully help us to be and to do what is right, we will have a fighting chance to think and declare that “we are fearfully and wonderfully made!”
I want to finish by referring you to Jackie Hill Perry, whose life story conveys the miraculous work of God in helping her to embrace her womanhood and His holy purposes for her. She and her husband, Preston, make regular podcasts. One is entitled “Gender Identity, Biblical Womanhood and Girly Girls” (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/with-the-perrys/id1458672189?i=1000466128686) and speaks to some of the gender stereotypes we encounter. The podcast also brings up differences from one ethnic culture to another. If you listen, let me know what you think!