What Is Her.meneutics?

The Christianity Today women's blog provides news and analysis from the perspective of evangelical women. We cover news stories and books related to international justice and evangelism, pregnancy and sexual ethics, marriage, parenting, and celibacy, pop culture, health and body image, raising girls, and women in the church and parachurch.

Her.meneutics is edited by associate editor Katelyn Beaty and online editor Sarah Pulliam Bailey.

Free Newsletters

books we're reading



« Should Pro-lifers Call Black Children an 'Endangered Species'? | Main | 'Femivores' and Food Ethics »

March 15, 2010

A Sinking Argument on Gender and Courage

Do secular feminists really want men to stop showing courtesy?

Lynn Cohick

Cultural commentator Al Mohler recently covered an unusual study that compared passenger behavior on the Titanic, in 1912, and the Lusitania, in 1915. The study, published this month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that men on the Titanic were more likely than those on the Lusitania to give up their lifeboat seats for women and children. On the Lusitania, which was struck by German torpedoes and sank in 18 minutes, more women and children died than did men, something the study attributes to the men’s physical strength and speed in getting to the lifeboats. Put bluntly, the men on the Lusitania acted selfishly, while those on the Titanic showed good manners.

3279461836_078feb313b_b.jpg

Mohler draws from this study a lesson on gender roles and the created order. He writes that “modern feminists” wish to eliminate “all meaningful gender distinctions,” which he believes would lead to the disregard that the Lusitania’s men showed for women and children. “Are we really to believe that the moral call that makes men act against their own self-preservation is just a socially constructed artifact of manners?” he asks. “The feminists . . . call for a world like the Lusitania, but must hope against hope that the world is really more like the Titanic.”

Unfortunately, this argument suffers from two serious flaws. First, the most telling of all the statistics is not taken into account: the overwhelming number of upper-class people, male and female, who were rescued on the Titanic. Time magazine reports thusly: “The Titanic’s first-class passengers had a 43.9% greater chance of making it off the ship and into a lifeboat than the reference group; the Lusitania’s, remarkably, were 11.5% less likely.” In other words, it is not so much that men gave their lifeboat seats to women, but that poor men and women gave up their seats to wealthy men and women. On the Titanic, poor women died and rich men lived. Neither today’s feminists nor Mohler would, I wager, want to support that trend today.

More troubling is the charge that secular feminists — in desiring equal access to educational and vocational opportunities — also want to do away with acts of kindness that men extend to women and children. But do feminists really ask that men stop being caring and nurturing, as they were on the Titanic? I assume that most feminists just want women to be considered as equal to the task — to be seen as courageous, caring, and life-giving as those brave men (and not a few women) on the Titanic.

440px-Titanic-New_York_Herald_front_page.jpeg

From a Christian perspective, I hope that believers who identify as feminists would applaud any human action that sides with the cause of the weak. But to assume that women are less responsible, less capable of making virtuous decisions, and less likely to show courage than men — as was the prevailing view of centuries past — is rightly challenged by many feminists today. We must distinguish between biological differences, such as percentage of muscle mass per body weight, and evaluative conclusions about women’s character and abilities vis-à-vis men. Thus, any person should help another who is physically weaker. This might mean that a man helps a woman; it might also mean that a young woman helps an old man. The call extended by Christians who are feminists is that men and women alike think of others above themselves, giving first place to the weak, poor, and helpless among them.

Courage to face death to save another’s life is not a virtue limited to men. Jesus makes clear that laying down one’s life for his or her friends is a call for all his disciples, male and female.

Lynn Cohick is professor of New Testament at Wheaton College, and author most recently of Women in the World of the Earliest Christians (Baker Academic). She has written for the women's blog about Jesus' mother and mammograms.

Share |

Posted by Katelyn Beaty on March 15, 2010 9:26 AM

Comments

having worked within a feministic organization for over 7 years, I became really concered with the ideal behind the concept, it's shocking but what some of those women want it is equality, it is almost the doing away with males in general which is ungodly. I believe that both genders are equal in the sight of God however we have different roles.

Posted By: sara Myers | March 16, 2010 7:42 AM

I am grateful for the many ways women have taught me to grow into a deep appreciation and respect for them as helpers and leaders. One served so capably as my assistant that I later volunteered to serve under her leadership. Among the things she taught me were to examine my inherent gender bias and revise my attitudes (and speech) where needed.

Another, an unknown young woman at a train station in Grenoble, France, graciously took my heavy suitcase as I struggled down a steep staircase with an aching back. Her practical compassion eased my mind and enabled me to catch my train! I was, and still am, deeply grateful for her willingness to joyfully serve this stranger.

Of course, my wife has been God's primary tool to teach me to respect women in a manner worthy of the Lord. She never ceases to amaze me with her abilities, her wisdom and servant's heart.

As I push on into my seventies, the Lord continues to teach me to value the women around me as peers and to be thankful for them.

Posted By: Rick Knox | March 16, 2010 8:58 AM

Excellent post. The continued mischaracterization of "modern feminists" (as though they are a homogenous group!) is troubling to say the least.

Posted By: Robyn | March 16, 2010 12:35 PM

Great post. The Titanic belonged to the era of Victorianism where the idea of men being "gentlemanly" led to the extreme of women being treated like pieces of china.

Posted By: Nadine | March 16, 2010 2:24 PM

Rick Knox,

Your comment made my whole day. What a wonderful example of practical one anothering, bearing another's burden, without all the gender hoopla that we usually see. God bless you, brother.

Posted By: thatmom | March 17, 2010 10:34 AM

Thanks for exploring this worrisome trend more fully and for offering an entirely appropriate, sensible solution! Although I strongly support women's rights to have the same opportunities as men and to be accorded the same respect, the idea that there are no differences between the sexes is misinformed and a cause for concern. Men are different physically, and studies of cognitive function and hormonal activity show evidence of differences, too. Radical feminists are so afraid these differences will be labeled "bad" that they would rather ignore them. That's a shame because God created our differences as strengths, not weaknesses. The efforts of such feminists would be better directed toward honoring existing differences rather than trying to abolish them, which will always be a losing battle against human nature. In the meantime, it only succeeds in making men and women ashamed of their innate abilities and desires.

However, as the author of this post implies, we are all one in Christ and "neither male nor female." God's salvation makes no distinction, and neither should we as we pattern our lives after Jesus. Just as the spiritual gifts we are given don't know the boundaries of gender, so also our physical gifts. Although strength is more often given to men, when women are stronger, they should also help (as with children or the elderly). At the end of the day, God asks us all to place others ahead of ourselves.

Posted By: The Lord Is My Shepherd | March 24, 2010 2:17 AM

Interesting post. There is still a collective belief in society that women and children should be put before men. This may be because women are often seen to be better up to the task of caring for children than men - which is obviously not always the case. Men are more than capable of caring for children.

Posted By: Psychologist Perth | January 24, 2011 2:03 AM

A very interesting article which raises the question "Should women and children be cared for before men?".

Posted By: Ballet School Perth | August 23, 2011 1:19 AM

Post a comment:





Verification (needed to reduce spam):

tags

February 2012
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29