Self-Subversion: Evangelical and Right-wing Feminism

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-65428204

By all accounts, there is a spectrum to modern feminism. Some feminists hate men and turn toward androgyny or ironically to an emulation of masculinity. Other forms of feminism celebrate femininity but it is recast and breaks with older forms and understandings of what that meant – often in forms of libertine expression – a certain conception of womanhood turned up a few notches as it were. Sometimes as a concept it begins to breakdown and blur and even poses as being anti-feminist – and yet ultimately is part of the same cultural subversion that has dismantled the older understandings of womanhood that once prevailed in society and certainly within the Church.

The present chaos is clearly evidenced by the crisis apparent in young women and the various psychoses regarding gender – which of course are ultimately spiritual in origin.

The feminism embraced by modern Evangelicalism often confuses sensuality with femininity and all too often combines this with what can only be described as a masculine assertiveness. Look at the linked BBC photo as an example of this. Earlier generations would have written off this woman as a forward tart and it wasn't that many years ago that had she been seen walking down the street she would have been assumed to be a prostitute. Had I been driving down Rosecrans in San Diego back in the 1980's – I certainly would have thought so. She would have blended in well enough with the other streetwalkers.

But note the two immodesties present – one in the form of sensuality and the other in the form of assertiveness – a warrior-masculine posture. Both represent a kind of exhibitionism and for a woman, nothing could be more immodest.

Biblical femininity includes concepts that modern feminists abhor – and this would include the Evangelicals among them. It is the shamefacedness mentioned in 1 Timothy 2 and the meek and quiet spirit referred to in 1 Peter. These Evangelical feminists and indeed the supposed anti-feminism of the Western Right reject this and as such deviate from Scriptural authority. It is in the context of this rejected femininity that women are commanded to be silent, not teaching in the Church, and under the authority of their husbands. Given the way Christian women behave and operate Monday-Friday (as it were), it is almost absurd to think they are going to suddenly don this submissive persona on Sunday morning. The problems are much deeper than simply questions of defining what preaching or what a pastor is. The problem is modern Evangelical women have abandoned and rejected Biblical concepts of womanhood.

It is granted that many men have abused this paradigm throughout history and it would be wrong to suggest (as some do) that all women must submit to all men. This abuse is indisputable but the correction to this is not to negate the Biblical teaching which Evangelicalism has clearly done. The assertive Evangelical women of our day represent a rejection of New Testament expectations of Christian femininity and demeanour. And just because all women aren't required to submit to all men doesn't mean that Christian women should now be bosses and managers – let along aggressive 'go-getter'-types. That's a formula for failed motherhood and marriage.

Once again, there are many unique situations requiring wisdom. There might be a situation in which a woman finds herself 'the boss' of a small family-owned company and has men answering to her – and that would in some instances be okay. It all just depends on the context and circumstance and I can't judge everyone's situation and am careful not to do so and would rather give people the benefit of the doubt. That said, this is a far cry from the briefcase in hand, woman in business suit kind of model that once occasioned a comedy movie such as Mr. Mom – but today is considered pretty normative. Even in my ostensibly Reformed congregation we have a Mr. Mom, the family is supported by the wife who due to her new (and celebrated) promotion now misses Sunday services half the time.

The Scriptures don't view this submission and meekness as 'demeaning' to women (in fact these women like Sarah are praised) and all of this is understood in light of redemptive-history, the story that unfolds from the Garden to the Cross to the Eschaton. Enlightenment society may view this as demeaning but that's their problem. It only becomes 'our' problem when the shepherds of the Church let this stuff in – which is what they've done. Often the motivation seems to be financial as to take a hard-line on these issues and demanding accountability would mean driving people away. At this point the wolves are prowling almost unchallenged and in fact many of the shepherds (maybe even most) are revealed to be wolves themselves.

Whether the activist in the BBC story is right or wrong in her cultural pursuits and concerns – to endorse her is to embrace an end justifies the means consequentialism.

In the name of cultural relevance, power, and economic status the acculturated Evangelical movement continues to move the goalposts and what was once considered subversive anti-Christian feminism is now the championed norm. They are able to do this by using the more extreme forms of contemporary feminism (which actually is a type of Female Supremacy) as a foil.

Feminism is so deeply ingrained in the culture and the Church that few are able to even process this or grasp what is being said. The implications lead to what many would consider an absurdity and they deem its application would leave the Church in a state of irrelevance – and as such it would certainly lose what little standing it has in society, as most Christian families would end up slipping out of the middle class.

As I have frequently argued, Evangelicalism's Accommodationist Triad has fully embraced modern psychology, feminism, and divorce. Almost any Church that takes a Biblical stand on these points will quickly diminish in numbers – and in the bureaucratic culture of denominational structures, will result in a pastor being removed. The rejection of these norms is so counter-cultural that few are interested.

Today the likes of Sarah Palin, Marjorie Taylor-Greene, and Lauren Boebert and upheld as paragons of Christian womanhood – yes, these very adulteresses and divorced women who are characterized by their brashness and crudity. One immediately thinks of Boebert's gun-toting ethos or perhaps her gala dress with 'Let's Go Brandon' written across the backside. Both examples (along with her divorce) all but proclaim her rejection of New Testament ethics, norms, and expectations of femininity. And yet she preaches sermons and is elevated as a hero.

These women along with the bevy of FOX channel beauty queens are celebrated when in fact they should be condemned. The Evangelical movement has sold its soul and under judgment has been blinded.

One also recalls the recent dust-up over Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman and his lack of decorum being interviewed in a sweatsuit. It is improper and disrespectful (and Fetterman is admittedly a joke if not a fraud) even though others such as Ted Cruz have showed up for votes in similar garb. Regardless, I fail to see how the likes of Boebert (who made the news criticising him) have any standing in this regard. And how is it respectful to shout at the president during his speeches? And aside from this, an earlier generation would have been appalled for women (let alone supposedly Christian women) to behave in such a manner. The whole thing is rather ridiculous and demonstrates the degenerate state of Evangelical thinking at this late stage of the movement.

Clearly this misguided faction is under judgment and is losing even basic categories of discernment. The great irony and perhaps the greatest judgment is that in the name of social conservatism, the movement has laboured over the past fifty years to undermine that very conservatism. You almost have to pause and really let that sink in.

The same is true of an outlet like Focus on the Family which has become a centre of Evangelical Feminism and psychology in the United States. The supposed bastion of conservatism and traditional family values is one of the primary factors in its erosion. We are reminded of this as we look at the BBC piece revealing an immodest and basically masculine woman who supposedly stands for traditional values and cultural mores – the truth is indeed stranger than fiction.