The CBE Scroll

Comment by Amanda B

July 28, 2009 @ 1:30 am

This is actually a subject I was considering very recently. I ran across a Christian blog for women the other day, and my first reaction was, “Whoa!! That’s purple! And flowery! Gosh, it’s so hard to look at.” For context, my favorite color is purple, and I am a fan of flowers.

It got me thinking. I had found this blog through its counterpart for men, which was done in nice, subtle tones and easy geometric designs. Its sister site for women, on the other hand, was over-the-top in purple and flowers and doing everything it could to scream “girly”. It bothered me. Everything from the difference in presentation to the tone of the writing felt like it was putting a solid distance between the more serious-minded men and the froofy, giggly girls (not so much “women”).

I don’t want to start overthinking things and seeing disrespect where there is none intended. But I have been surprised more and more lately with how deep this issue can go and how many spheres of life it can hit, including marketing.

I hope one of your authors will blog more extensively about this subject. I am interested to hear your thoughts on it.

Comment by codepoke

July 31, 2009 @ 2:59 pm

I did not attend the conference, and did not see the ppt. As such I’m not qualified to question, but maybe to ask questions?

What’s wrong with pink and blue?

A recent study points out that acts of violence committed by women began increasing dramatically ~18 years after the TV started showing numerous women committing acts of violence. (Think Buffy the Vampire Slayer and other such heroically violent stuff.) Given that and other evidence, you’ll find me agreeing that stereotypes are powerful and important, but not necessarily that they’re all bad.

Bad cultural guidance is bad, but culture and gender-specific culture is not necessarily bad.

When they acceidentally bred the mating dance out of roosters (trying to breed for other, desirable traits) they created a bunch of rapist roosters. We need our gender differences to connect in many healthy ways.

I’m sorry for the choppy post, but I’m already late. Thanks for listening.

Comment by Lin

July 31, 2009 @ 7:23 pm

Here is our problem. Where in scripture, before the fall, do we see anything about specific gender differences except the obvious physical/biological?

How do we know whether differences like emotions, verbal skills, intellectual are nature or nurture?

Alot of money is made selling books that tell us where we should fit in the pink and blue.

Women are just as ruthless as men. They just usually use methods that are more acceptable to society if they are women. In days past, they would use manipulation if they had no power or strength.

Comment by codepoke

July 31, 2009 @ 9:59 pm

I’ve got a little more time now, and the subject is still on my mind.

Culture is.

Culture is not good or evil; it just is. American culture has blended an awful lot of evil with an awful lot of good, and boatloads of stuff that’s just human. That boys and girls are different is a foundation stone of humanity as created by God. That we’ve learned ways to relate to each other and to signal to each other what we’re like is culture. We need that.

If culture says men are valuable and women are valueless, that’s evil. If culture says men should provide for their wives with small children, that’s good. If culture says a man who establishes a solid career with a solid future is looking for a high-quality wife and partner, that’s just a signal. We need the agreed upon, comfortable, and understood language our mothers taught us about courtship. We’re wired from day one to court in certain ways, and that’s part and parcel of being human.

If a small subset of Americans teaches their sons to court in a completely unique way, normal American daughters are not going to know they’re being courted.

The New Testament says nothing about courtship roles, because there’s nothing to be said. I don’t see scripture trying to tell us the perfect, God-given way to court, therefore I conclude there’s not a God-given way to court. There’s love expressed within the context of an existing culture. I whole-heartedly believe it’s enough to love within the culture to radically shock the culture. We need to challenge the evil within our culture, but we don’t need to change it whole cloth. It’s enough to reject true evil and to love within our culture to turn the world upside down.

Comment by Lin

August 1, 2009 @ 8:28 am

“We need to challenge the evil within our culture, but we don’t need to change it whole cloth. It’s enough to reject true evil and to love within our culture to turn the world upside down.”

I agree we need to challenge the evil in our culture but isn’t that what the comps think they are doing with pink and blue Christianity and specific roles for men and women?

Comment by codepoke

August 1, 2009 @ 8:04 pm

Yours is a very difficult question to assess, much less to answer, Lin.

There are some very intelligent, caring, observant, healing, accurate, loving comps in the world. They observe the benefits of pink and blue, and attempt to grow those benefits for all of [us/them/those/etc.] They also get some things wrong and say pink cannot lead; pink cannot provide; pink cannot decide.

The comps are right about boys and girls being different. Letting go of that fact actually seems to me to cost the egal case.

Not every man is “royal blue” and not every woman is “lacy pink,” and praise the Lord. When pink and blue become prescriptive instead of descriptive, we have a problem. Each of us needs to grow into that for which God created us, not into a checklist.

On the other hand, pink and blue marketing works because more of us are common shades of pink and blue than are not. And blue and pink help us relate to each other during several awkward stages of life.

I’m not ready to let go of useful parts of a decent culture.

Comment by Lin

August 1, 2009 @ 11:32 pm

“The comps are right about boys and girls being different. Letting go of that fact actually seems to me to cost the egal case”

How? Understanding that the obvious physical differences are not in question, how does pink and blue in terms of intellect, emotions, etc, help egalitarianism?

I am not sure how this relates to a ‘decent’ culture?

Comment by Liz

August 2, 2009 @ 6:43 am

I think this discussion could be helped by saying ‘you had to be there’.

The photos of various items for sale in Christian bookshops portrayed such an obvious contrast between things for boys and girls. Those of us who have occasion to be in these stores could echo the sentiments expressed as we look for gifts for children and young people which are gender neutral and related to a godly lifestyle. The overarching message these products give is that girls are empty-headed and concerned mostly with their appearance while boys can be free to be themselves and have an adventurous life. While the producers of these ‘Christianised” products may not have a particular agenda related to gender bias, it certainly is displayed in the range of items for sale.

Comment by Lin

August 2, 2009 @ 11:04 am

When we mention descriptive vs prescriptive when thinking in pink and blue, I could not help but think of this speech:

Sojourner Truth (1797-1883): Ain’t I A Woman?
Delivered 1851
Women’s Convention, Akron, Ohio

Well, children, where there is so much racket there must be something out of kilter. I think that ‘twixt the negroes of the South and the women at the North, all talking about rights, the white men will be in a fix pretty soon. But what’s all this here talking about?

That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man – when I could get it – and bear the lash as well! And ain’t I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain’t I a woman?

Then they talk about this thing in the head; what’s this they call it? [member of audience whispers, "intellect"] That’s it, honey. What’s that got to do with women’s rights or negroes’ rights? If my cup won’t hold but a pint, and yours holds a quart, wouldn’t you be mean not to let me have my little half measure full?

Then that little man in black there, he says women can’t have as much rights as men, ’cause Christ wasn’t a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothing to do with Him.

If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back , and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them.

Obliged to you for hearing me, and now old Sojourner ain’t got nothing more to say.

Comment by codepoke

August 3, 2009 @ 6:17 am

Pullin’ out the Sojourner. ;-)

Well, we’re probably just talking past each other. The time comes when every conversation has to be released, and this may be the time on this one. As Liz and I both pointed out, I was not there so my contributions to the discussion are uninformed anyway.

May the Lord’s kingdom continue to grow and show us what it’s going to be when it’s all grown up.

Comment by Joanne

August 3, 2009 @ 8:26 am

I just want to weigh in. I think the Bible says very little about gender differences. It however, describes men and women in the context of the story that is being told. And it tells about how men and women were in the first century (and before as in the OT).

Our culture is based to a large degree on western civilization and still has the remnants of gender socializations that were common in the Greco-Roman world.

So when writers write about pink and blue they allude to such socializations as if they are fact when they are really socializations.

I also think that the bearing of children changes both men and women in profound ways. Suddenly parents are confronted with precious vulnerable children they must raise and they make decisions to care for and nurture their children. We are changed by that experience. Men and women down through the ages have communicated skills and behaviors that have helped families survive.

I think our world is very different and roles are changing because our world is changing. There are more ways and more strategies to nurture children and care for them ethically and Christianly.

I think it is misapplication of the bible to use it as a road map for gender socialiation and for defining what a man is and what a woman is. We should not make it something it was not intended to do.

We can and I think the church is doing this … return to a socialization pattern that was common in the first century and before as in the Patriarch movement. We will seriously disconnect with our world as recent books written by journalists, (The Family and Quiverfull) have revealed.

Comment by Lin

August 3, 2009 @ 2:30 pm

“So when writers write about pink and blue they allude to such socializations as if they are fact when they are really socializations. ”

Exactly

Comment by em

August 6, 2009 @ 8:35 pm

Its not so much that there is something wrong with pink and blue, but when one, for instance blue, becomes more privileged than the other- or is said to reflect God’s attributes more fully than the other. I think there was a sociological experiment, I am sorry but I forget the name – but the children were divided up by the color of their eyes. The blue eyed children were told that they were better than the brown eyed children. This created an atmosphere of opression.

Also- it becomes a problem when society states what blue or pink must be.