I've been pondering some feminist issues for a while and have been meaning to write a blog about it so here I go, this comes to you rather unplanned but then there's nothing new! I've mostly been thinking about the changes in women's' roles over the last century, why this happened and what that now means for the modern woman thinking about what her identity is and her purpose in life lets say is.
I've mostly come up against this sort of thing whilst looking into the sociology of religion, more specifically the changes in the social significance of religion in twentieth century Britain. I've read that one of the major factors in the dwindling popularity of Christianity in this country was the change in the roles of women in the 1960s. Women apparently before this catastrophic (for the Church anyway) decade, were seen as the epitome of spirituality and homeliness and were no where near as prone to brutishness, lewdness and debauchery as men and so having a good woman in your life kept you on the straight and narrow and was basically the basis of your spirituality. When women ceased to go along with this model of homeliness, the woman is like the hearth of the family, religion goes down the pan but of course this is not the only thing that is effected.
These changes in the role of women had already begun with suffrage at the turn of the twentieth century but the 60s saw an increase in women being sexually 'liberated', pursuing careers and becoming less interested in being housewives. I don't claim to know really why these things happened, I do think some of the changes were necessary, I think it only fair that it become socially acceptable for women to pursue education and training that puts them in boardrooms alongside men and be paid the same for doing the same job that requires the same level of training. Change was bound to happen I believe as women have been marginalised to an extent, some of the restrictions on women make me wonder why men ever thought women needed to exist in the first place or needed the same faculties as men. If all women are there for is to be the pretty woman to wash and cook and clean for you and to provide heirs for you why does she need to speak or to think? Can we say that men have dominated women for a long time? If so is this what should have been happening therefore change in the roles and opportunities for women is the right thing to do? I certainly don't think that women should turn the tables and dominate men in amazonian fashion, but what should gender relations be like? Men and women should be equal in my view but what does this mean?
Another question I wish to put out into the cosmos is are the changes in the roles of women actually good? This is where the title of the blog come in a little. I've read recently about the 'desperate housewife syndrome' which is basically anorexia that is developed later in life in response to trying to 'have it all' a career, a family, great sex and a good body. Only women can be mothers in the biological sense of the word of course and I do think women share the world over the characteristics needed to be a mother but is the desire to stay at home with the baby and then on top of that keep house something all mother are supposed to want to do? In a way there is still the general expectation that the woman will be the one to stay at home with the baby if one parent is going to do that. Women could therefore feel torn between making use of their opportunities to pursue glittering careers and becoming a mother which does often end up in women waiting a long time before having children then giving up said career to have said children. This is also a reason why some women feel penalised at work because their bosses don't want to deal with the fact that a female employee will very likely leave at some point to have a baby and probably wont want to come back which will result in them having to go through the rigmarole of finding someone else. The pressure of juggling everything sees some women turning to controlling their food because that's the only thing they feel they can control; what goes into their mouth.
Women have been the ones gunning for change for themselves but are many women happy with the outcome or realise how far women have come? Many women's liberation activists would probably want to go on changing women's roles but interestingly all they seem to have ever done is in response to male identity as it is. I have never really come across women who have wished to tackle the attitudes of men whether this is necessary or not but male identity has never been in question. It seems then, you could say it can be none other than reactionary, all of the changes in women's roles have been in reaction to men, what do men do and have, women should do and have the same. I'm not sure if this is really the solution to addressing the inequalities between men and women. I think men also need to address themselves as whoever said that make identity the way that it is, is the ideal? This seems to be what is being asserted when women campaign to have exactly the same as men, are there some thing neither men nor women should have or be doing? Men are apparently more prone to brutishness, does that make it acceptable? Should this not be addressed? I cannot personally see a way forward and do not presume that anyone should subscribe to my opinions. All I will say is that men and women are certainly equal in value, God loves men and women the same, in Christ there is no male or female. This is half the reason I feel the way I do about women preaching and is the major thing I have in mind whenever I consider what the applications of the mystical union between Christ and the Church are for human marriage, I am fairly relaxed about what men and women DO because as long as man is not doing something that questions the equal value of a woman and vice versa why be so het up about it?
