November 20 2009 18:39:42
Navigation
· Home
· Discussion Forum
· News Categories
· Staff Page
· Search
· RSS Feeds
· Ultimate Stat Page
· Links
· Contact
· Voice Your Opinion
News Feeds




Welcome
Does "God, the Father" Lead to the Supression of Women?

Advert
Opinions Share
According to dictionary.com, the definition of the word “father” includes the following: as a noun, it is “any male ancestor, the founder of a race, a person that has originated or established something, a precursor, prototype…” and as a verb, “to be the creator, founder, or author of.”
For years, people have been questioning the reasoning behind God, the Father. Many people have posed the question as to why—first, and foremost—God is given a gender and is seen in an anthropomorphic manner, and if so, why the gender is male.
Some religious scholars have surmised that by referring to God in a patriarchal sense, it confirms the idea that men are in direct link to him and to Christ, and that women are linked to God and Christ only in a mediatory capacity.
This idea makes sense if the nature of the majority of societies is examined. In most every culture and civilization, women are seen as second class citizens, even before the Biblical story of Eve and the Garden of Eden, there was the Greek myth of Pandora, who opened the box and unleashed all the woes of humanity. Faced with these stories, it makes sense that God would be seen as male rather than female; according to these stories, to be female is to be untrustworthy, and God cannot be untrustworthy.
The question of whether or not calling God the father makes the suppression of women easier can also be posed. Why not just refer to God as God, the mother? Or as Godess? But by feeling the need to change the ideals of using God, the father instead of Goddess, the mother or even God, the mother, it becomes reverse subordination: to use one gender over the other automatically lessens the power and raises the level of subordination of the gender not being used.
When you really think about it, just like God has no race—though people are trying to make designations about that as well—God should have no gender. If God is the Lord, the creator, and in fact is everything, then it stands to reason that God is both male and female. And in keeping that thought in mind, then the evaluation of God’s actions fall in line with this belief. In the Bible, God is written as having created the world, and nurturing all human beings. These characteristics are mostly female in nature.
On the same note, when God is portrayed as exuding strength, as punishing, and judging, these actions seem a though they are ones that fall in line with males. Much like the duality of these actions, nurture and punishment, male and female ought to exist in God simultaneously, or at least they seem capable to.
Comments
#1 | ethwc on October 30 2009 17:01:31
As I read the Greek mythologies in the past, I was struck by the rather amoral nature of almost all of their deities, male or female. I found that none of them appealed to my sense of an entity to whom I would look for succor. That said, I tend to agree that, if one must believe in a creative presence in the universe, it need not be assigned a gender except for convenience of discussion. I have found that my fundamentalist friends get really upset when I refer to God as "It." That, of course, makes it all the more fun to do so.

While I tend to agree with much of what you say, I am a little disturbed by the tendency of late to seem to push beyond the level of equality of the sexes. I guess one might justify this because of the centuries of female subjugation, however, subjugating others for whatever reason is not right nor good.

Finally, I believe it a very slippery slope indeed to ascribe some human characteristics to female and others to male. That is every bit as inappropriate as ascribing sex to God. Many men are incredibly nurturing and many women are incredibly judgemental and punitive (check out the actions of many women in power positions in corporate America). The point is that we should all interact with each other with compassion, courtesy and tolerance. These are human characteristics that could go a long way toward easing some of the problems in our world and nation.
#2 | MplsVala on November 03 2009 01:11:24
I suspect that you have a point here. When the APA was considering language use, they pointed to a great number of studies which showed that sexist language actually harmed girls. That's why the APA standards require gender-neutral language. The same harms could well apply to religious terminology.
#3 | rwahrens on November 03 2009 12:50:10
Well, my first reaction is, why have a "god" in the first place?

It was all well and good for primitive societies that had no idea of how the universe worked to create weather, how the sun rose and set, what made the tides, how the seasons came and went and why, etc.

But our modern scientifically based society knows these things. We KNOW that no god is required to usher the sun across the sky in a golden chariot, so we worship no sun god. We KNOW what causes lightening, so we don't bother to worship some white bearded god that supposedly throws lightening bolts at those he dislikes. We have a much better idea of how the universe itself began and developed, so we really don't need a bronze aged sky fairy to explain what we already know.

Many past societies were not as misogynistic as the modern Abrahamic religions are today. (Yeah, I know that the Jewish part isn't as bad as the other two, but they still, in the old Orthodox temples, separate men and women, and women can't read from the Torah, among other misogynistic crap.)

If you want to blame someone for this, blame the old christian bishops in the late 2nd century as they dismantled the then-current practices that allowed females to head churches (mostly at Paul's urging, see many of the Pauline letters), and good ole' Mohammed for doing the same in his incarnation of god worship.

Almost all of the old "pagan" religions had female deities that were as powerful as the males, and practiced a balanced worship of both sexes, as they recognized that the largely agrarian lives they led required both sexes to act as a team to raise a family, collect or raise food for the table and protect the family from predators. Traditional human nuclear families do NOT require the female to be subservient to the male, but assign gender specific roles based largely upon biological functions - and those functions both require the support and mutual cooperation of both sexes to properly nurture the family unit. Each is fully dependent upon the other to be successful. The religions of the past recognized this, and created male and female gods and goddesses to account for this cooperative symbiosis.

Our modern society, with its technological labor saving devices, have largely leveled the playing field in much of the sex based role assignments as seen in traditional human cultures. Women are capable of "bringing home the bacon" largely without the need for the larger, stronger musculature of the male; men can feed the baby without the biological necessity for the female breast. Social structures such as police and fire departments and modern weapons such as firearms have largely replaced the need for males to be readily armed and prepared to defend the family unit using physical strength alone. Thank Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson for that!

So role models today are not based upon the traditional sex based roles dependent upon the different secondary sex characteristics of men and women, but are blending and merging into something much less differentiated.

But to answer the original question, yeah, "god the father", DOES result in the suppression of women. Toss the sucker out!
Post Comment
Please Login to Post a Comment.
Ratings
Rating is available to Members only.

Please login or register to vote.

No Ratings have been Posted.
Latest Articles
Last 10 Comments
Have They No Shame . . .
11019 seaman93555 - How could anyone forget Senator Kennedy and Health Care Reform so soon? Maybe your agenda has clouded your memory a little? You do not have to look far for other examples. - Peacemaker
Robert Byrd Becomes Longest-Serving Congress Member
11902 [b]How about his stand on Civil Rights! Yeah - Long and Productive.. Senator Robert Byrd (D) opposed the Civil Rights act, we all know this guy right? I mean he is still someone the Dems all loo - Peacemaker
Who Owns the Moon?
11867 Seems the only answer to this question is war...after all it's the "American Way". - Timothy Shay
CIA Seeks U.S. Arabs With New TV Spot
11908 The November 19 column of Obsidian Wings (see it at [u - ethwc
Reid Remains Optimistic on New Health Care Bill
11901 Now that I got that off my chest, I would like to discuss what I believe to be the crux of the health care reform debate. Today, on Alternet, there is a diatribe about insurance companies ongoing den - ethwc
Reid Remains Optimistic on New Health Care Bill
11901 He needs 51 votes to pass the bill. He needs 60 only in the event of a filibuster. While this may be a technicality, it is a fact and it would be nice if we were able to deal in facts at least in so - ethwc
Abortion Rights Attacked by New Health Care Bill
11841 [quote]This provision needs to be stripped in reconciliation.[/quote] Why? So I (Joe Blow taxpayer) will be forced into paying for others elective surgeries?? - BoilerUp
Catholic Church Threatens Washington, D.C. on Same-Sex Marriage
11866 You got it in one! - rwahrens
Who Owns the Moon?
11867 touche humans have always handled expansion the same way...isn't going to change now or in the future. what about all this busienss w/ antarctica? it would be the first - and last - contine - showerjuggernaut
Catholic Church Threatens Washington, D.C. on Same-Sex Marriage
11866 I might consider accepting such sillliness were God to say it for itself. However, when I am told what God intends to be said and that intention is interpreted by self appointed emissaries, I tend to - ethwc
Most Recent Opinion Pieces
Who Owns the Moon?
Women Behaving Badly
Arguing over abortion…haven’t we heard this before?
Will the Droid be an iPhone Killer?
So Bloomberg bought a public office. Your point is…?
Sex sells, but do you have to sell it while I'm eating dinner?
Bloomburg Wins - Using the Power of Money
The Beginning Of The End For Dems
Lessons we won’t take away from Balloon Boy incident
Does "God, the Father" Lead to the Supression of Women?
Hate crime legislation
Controlled scientific experiment
China and North Korea: Finding an Equilibrium
Caveat Emptor
Is This Progress?
Ethics and the Nobel Prize for Literature
WALLOWING IN PESSIMISM
Happy 17th Wedding Anniversary To the Obama’s!
A case of disgraceful bank conduct
An aritst who takes one's breath away
Advertisers
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Adverts
Top Stories Past 7 Days
Who Owns the Moon? 8
Catholic Church Threatens Washington, D.C. on Same-Sex Marriage 6
Abortion Rights Attacked by New Health Care Bill 5
China Warns Obama Against Meeting Dalai Lama 2
Apple Reverses Its Decision on Political iPhone Application 2
Reid Remains Optimistic on New Health Care Bill 2
An aritst who takes one's breath away 2
EU Views Brazilian Climate Change Plan as Breakthrough 1
President Obama Seeks Accountability in Fort Hood Rampage 1
Rumors Swirling About Apple’s Potential Black Friday Discounts 1