will you submit to me? circle yes or no.

i am suffering from an identity crisis.

it's been just over one year since i graduated from college. it took some time for me to feel comfortable as a non-student. it took some time for me to know how to talk about my life without school. it helped that graduation hadn't been so long ago. i could still say 'i just graduated in may.' i can't say that anymore - we're already in another may.

fortunately, i've almost completely coped with being a non-student. now i have to find an identity as a regular person, an adult with no student role on which to blame things. my new roles have to be taken more seriously. i'm a woman. what does that mean? i'm a follower of Christ. what does that mean? i'm a part of a body of people who follow Christ. what does that mean? i am a close friend and family member. what does that mean?

i think that when i was younger, all of these roles just were. i didn't do anything to get them - they happened to me, and so i reacted. now, i feel a responsibility for figuring out what each of these things mean, and how i can best fill them all at once.

the role that i have been struggling with the most lately has been my role as a woman, more particularly, my role as a now single, maybe one day married, Christ-following woman.

i know that i write about gender stuff a lot (maybe not, but it seems like it), but it's because, like i said, in this season of my life, i'm really working to figure out who i am and what that means. being a woman is a giant part of that because there has been SO much information thrown at me throughout my life about what a christian woman should look like. so much information that i have often felt like i am drowning in it, like it is an upset sea and i am an infant.

much of this information has been untrue and not at all in the heart of God (which is what i am trying to pursue). in fact, i have a book on my shelf at home right now entitled '10 Lies the Church Tells Women.' to be honest, i haven't read that book, but i like that it's there - it reminds me that it's okay to be discriminatory when it comes to this angry sea of information.

i have been so blessed and encouraged by christianity over the last year - continually learning more about the love and compassion that, if sought in earnest, Christ brings. i am always meeting people in this area - progressive, liberal people who have little interest in the heart of God, but who i feel i can connect with. it is exciting to me that the ideas of christianity can be so accessible to anyone seeking peace and justice.

now, what does this have to do with my identity crisis? i will tell you.

Ephesians 5
²⁴Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

as i was saying before, almost everything that is important to me, as a christian, often makes perfect sense to those uninterested in my faith. however, when i get to the part about a woman in a christian marriage (submission - ahhh), everything kind of falls apart. i picture in my head a conversation between myself and one of these progressive, liberal women. i barely get the words 'wives, submit . . .' out of my mouth and she punches me right in the face. i do not want to get punched. i do not want to stop having these wonderful, unifying conversations. what do i do?

actually, this isn't just about not getting punched. this is also about reconciling within me what sometimes feels like a nagging discrepancy. i believe that i was created by a loving God. i believe that i was created as a beautiful, feminine human. i believe that, as this beautiful, feminine human, i am just as valuable to my Creator as any other human and have just as much to offer. why, then would this Creator tell me to submit to another human? surely i was not created somehow inferior, in need of someone else to make me more complete, make my life more full and worthy. it is difficult not to interpret this piece of scripture as a kind of blow to women. i'm sorry if that's upsetting, but it's true. if, in a workplace, my supervisor told me to submit to another employee, would it not be right to assume that that supervisor thought that other employee somehow more able than myself?

all of this was bothering me in an undeniable and increasing way. last weekend, in fact, the sermon at church included this passage that includes the 's word.' i cried tears of frustration through most of the sermon - not something i have ever done before. i just couldn't figure out how to reconcile my own understanding of God with this idea of wives submitting to their husbands.

(note: it still bothers me that some christian men seem to accept this whole idea without question. fight with us to clear up this whole thing, to make sense of it. please don't just take it for granted.)

a lot has happened in my mind since last sunday. many conversations have taken place, much reflection and prayer has gone on, and i think that i'm finally at peace, or at least approaching peace. the following are things that have help me approach peace.

• Ephesians 5 ²⁵Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her - if i was in a relationship with someone, anyone, romantic or otherwise, and i 100% trusted that they had my best interest at heart and that they loved me as much as Christ loves the church, why wouldn't i trust them to make a decision that affected both of us?
• the idea of 'servant leadership' (every milliganite's ears just perked) is a very christian idea, and one that is a bit foreign to those many of those not committed to that faith. this concept of leading someone by serving them - leading them into selflessness and love by showing it to them - is not exactly a Wall Street key to success. therefore, when we speak of 'submission,' minds automatically think of being stepped on, not of being raised up. this submission that i speak of, and that i think the Bible speaks of, is a (somewhat-in our better moments) natural response to overwhelming love. if a husband's 'leadership' is one of sacrifice and love (Christ), then the wife's submission is similar, is it not? one might call this relationship one of mutual submission.
  
• it is a problem of language. if this person who may or may not be punching me in the face (see earlier paragraph) saw a marriage dedicated to these principals of love and submission, i don't think they would find it misogynistic at all. i think they would find it beautiful. it's only when this relationship is described that there are problems - there is no way to say submission without tempting your audience to pull out their copy of the Emancipation Proclamation.
  
• i am only instructed to practice this 'submission' to my husband (should i ever have one). therefore, this is NOT a statement on the way women and men should interact, only husbands and wives.
• men and women are different. they are equal, but different. sometimes i think that we get caught up fighting for women to be equal to men, that we find ourselves fighting for women to be the same as men. i don't want to be the same as a man. i want to be a woman. so, i should accept that because we are different, there are important things that i can offer a husband (should i ever have one) that are less important that he offer me, things that he will value more than i will. i haven't really figured out what all of these things are, mostly due to lack of experience. i have observed, however, that maybe men need more to feel respected, trusted and reliable, whereas women need more to feel valued, appreciated and loved. so maybe this submission/love type of relationship helps cater to the needs of both sexes. who knows. i could be way off - like i said, a lack of experience.

well, i think that's about it. my identity crisis is not over, but i am making progress. hopefully these things will help me avoid drowning in an angry sea and/or being punched in the face.

i grow a bit anxious

i haven't posted recently. as time passes between posts, i grow increasingly anxious. why? umm. well, it's either because i'm afraid i'll lose readers (hah), or i'm afraid i've run out of things to say (hah hah).

but, in all seriousness, i think it's the latter.

i don't, this minute, have anything profound to say. in fact, it's arguable that i ever have anything profound to say. in any case, i'd like to thank everyone for all of the feedback i received concerning my last post. if you're a blogger and wonder if anyone reads your blog, write about gender issues and you'll find out pretty quick.

the response was generally positive, with some concerns here and there about my denial of gender differences (we'll stay away from 'roles') - i think i've come to an understanding with all those concerned, i think. (women and men are different, but equal.) if anyone would like to enlighten/challenge me further, please do, or i will, in fact, kick you in the shin :)

someone mentioned the rising generation of males' lack of respect for women - they called it heartbreaking. i would have to agree. though i think that the rising generation of people have a general lack of respect for most things - the elderly, the middle-aged, me, each other. they do respect what tv tells them to respect, which i wish included regular people, rather than only the rich, famous, powerful, beautiful and plastic. is this a development? i don't know. i suppose that as generations pass, civil propriety is less and less of a concern and the instant gratification promised by technology captures focus.

also, it seems that as these young men continue to disrespect women, the young women expect less, require less. which came first? i couldn't say, but none of it is good. if the men were to begin respecting more, perhaps the women would expect more, but it would work the other way too, presumably.

it's funny how scantily clad women singing and dancing in ways that some (I) might find inappropriate think of themselves as being empowering to women.

i read about this band (they will remain nameless, though i'm sure a quick google search would steal their anonymity). there are 4 or 5 of them - all women, and they play shows without shirts. in the article, they were quoted as saying that they do this to empower young women to be confident and comfortable with their bodies.

am i the only one who finds this to be ridiculous? they are beautiful, thin musicians, and they think that by taking off their clothes, they are going to make young women feel better about themselves? they get more attention for their lack of clothing than for their music, and this is supposed to be empowering women?

isn't that kind of what we've been working against for decades? (i'll stop with the rhetorical questions now.) no one was arguing that women are attractive without their shirts. people were arguing what women could offer with their shirts on. this (maybe) talented group of women would inspire me if they left their clothes on and made good music - innovative, truthful music. that would make me feel empowered as a women - to know that i could make it in the music industry based on hard work and talent and without sacrificing any clothing.

hmm. i promise that when i started this post, i wasn't going to write about anything except some inconsequential bits of information about my life - i spent a lovely week with my friend johannah, we played a fun little show, i'm selling my car, i'm looking for another car to buy, yaddah yaddah yaddah. and here i am, at the end of another tirade.

my apologies for your thoughts :)

katie vs. the south

i grow weary of gender-role conversations.

i really do.

mostly because i hate feeling like a jerk, which is what always happens. i think it's because i'm misunderstood. i do not seek to batter kind men. that's not it at all. i'm not here to kick any man in the shin who even thinks about opening a door for me, or not allowing me to do manual labor.

thank you, kind men, for your kind deeds. it is not your actions against which i argue.

for some of you (and some of you women too) - it is your motivations, your thinking, your mindset.

i am 100% for acting kind, loving and courteous towards members of the opposite sex. that's very nice. i am not, however, willing to accept that these gestures are necessary or expected because you are a man and i am a woman. i do not want that door held for me (though i promise not to kick anyone in the shin) if it is because you are a man and i am a woman, i want it held for me because we are two human beings and you are showing kindness and consideration.

if i hold a door for a man out of this same kindness and consideration, i do not want to be looked at as if i am some sort of terrorist seeking the demise of the american family. i am not. i am simply seeking equality and understanding, love, humility, selflessness, and everything else that can be developed through remembering to serve others.

i think that my perspective is a bit unique because i have been rather independent for a very long time - no boyfriends carrying things or fixing my sink. now that i am in the south, men often offer to do things like walk me to my car, even when it's not very far and the journey is through a populated parking lot. i feel awkward when this happens, and i act awkwardly, and then the man rolls his eyes because he knows i am one of 'those girls' (the terrorist kind). this saddens me. i don't mean to be awkward and ungrateful. men, think of if every time we ate together, i offered to cut your food. that would seem awkward and unnecessary, right? sort of like i was treating you like a child? well, that's what these little gestures feel like to me.

(further more, if i were to offer to walk another female to her car, i would get the same terrorist look, as well as the awkward and unnecessary look. why? i think that i would be able to provide as much safety as many a man. if you're getting attacked, having another person around, be they man or woman, would be rather helpful, would it not?)

i'm working on being more accepting of these things, but it would be easier for me to do so, if i felt confident in the thoughts behind them.

let me reiterate that i am not calling for the cessation of all chivalric behavior, or any chivalric behavior. all i wish to challenge, is the thought behind it. i don't mind if a man offers to carry something heavy for me. he's probably stronger than me, so that makes sense. i'm not saying i wont offer to cook something for a man, if there's a good chance i'll be better at it. i would also offer to cook something for a woman, if there's a good chance i'll be better at it. this shouldn't be offensive, just like it shouldn't be offensive for a stronger man to offer to carry something for a not-so-strong man. we are all people with different abilities, largely disconnected to our genders. let us offer them up accordingly and offer little things out of love and not out of duty.

please, don't consider yourself kicked in the shin.

share your thoughts.

much love.