Of Blogs, Girls and Graduate School
Okay, so let's face it: I am no JTB when it comes to blogging. Before Japan I occasionally blogged about society and theology. Now the blog is functioning solely as an online scrapbook. I would like to change this, but I'm not sure I have what it takes to consistently produce though-provoking entries. So, maybe I'll start slowly and see how it goes.
The question of gender roles has been on my mind of late. Incidentally, this coincides with my dating Will. I'm a little confused about some things. For example, I love that I'm independent and strong-willed. However, both of us like and accept the idea of Will being my protector. But don't those two sentences sound a bit contradictory? I would like some feedback on this.
Another item on my mind is future graduate school. I keep up with several doctoral students of theology and their blogs. And, I think: "These people are way smarter than I am." Unlike some other person I don't think a 1550 on the GRE is in store for me. But it's more than just smartness and test scores. Do I really want to spend ten years of my life in school, in debt, with no real job, taking some classes I might hate, just so I can teach at the university level? The answer is...probably. I guess we'll see.
Labels: gender, graduate school
Posted by TKP at 7:48 PM
9 Comments
There are different roles that God gives men and women. These different roles do not make one gender more dominant or submissive. It is very natural for women to desire for a man to be her "protector". This does not make us weaker. If anything it is something for us to draw strength from. God made us to compliment eachother. If you are both Christians the roles that you each play within the relationship are to be decided by you, and you should NEVER worry about what anyone else thinks. Love ya, E.McSween
Wouldn't you protect Will if the need arose? Or your baby, were you to have a baby? Why is "protection" seen as "male" or desire for protection seen as "female"? I think it's more likely that people of both genders possess both instincts. We all need to feel secure. We also all have (some, limited) ability and need to ensure the security of those we love.
Perhaps it is the connotation of physical force associated with the concept "protection" and the association of physical strength with maleness that explains our cultural habit of assuming protection as a violent thing, a male thing. I would say, in contrast, that protection is not always a matter of brute physical strength or force; and anyhow, women are often adequately physically strong to act as protectors in this limited sense as well.
What was that? The F-word? Did you just say "feminist"??? You betcha.
I'm a traditionalist... in a lot of ways.
First off, I don't see how role definition in any way addresses value. Which is better a tea cup or a sledge hammer? Have you tried drinking from a sledge hammer or crushing cement with a tea cup.
Secondly, even if there is an issue with gender roles, that doesn't mean that one person is weak. For instance, you have the hulk and superman on a team... is superman a sissy now? A stong person can depend on a stronger person and not be considered weak.
I think a central problem here, like JTB said, is that we're too engrossed with very specific (physical) definitions of words like "protection" and "strength." But even if those definitions did fully convey the meaning of those words, they still would not entail any particular associated "role" for either gender; I know of plenty of women who serve all sorts of physically protective roles for all sorts of other persons and things. In other words, I'm for a more accurate expansion of both the definitions of the words we use and also gender "roles." I'm also definitely for the more frequent use of the phrase "you betcha."
I think that as long as Will understands you're his protector, too - and nurturer, provider, friend, and companion - it'll all work out just fine.
I agree with Keith. I too am a strong-willed, independent woman, and I found this seeming contradiction difficult at first. Although it's taken some time to balance my personality with my status as Jeremy's wife, we've worked it out pretty darn well. I love that my husband is my "protector" - and he loves that I'm his. It's not a contradiction. It only looks like one until you've had the time to grow and love into it.
Hey. I posted with my thoughts on the subject.
One thing that occurred to me as I was reading that fabulous book you loaned me while I was in Japan is how little I have realized the importance of my role as a guardian of man's sense of self-worth. While guys relish the role of protecting us from the big bad world in many respects (and rightly so), they are vulnerable in ways that we are uniquely positioned to be able to help them and build them up.
Also, I bet Will loves that you're strong-willed and independent in some respects. Those aren't necessarily bad things. Just like with other things in our Christian walks, though, you have to make sure they don't become excuses for selfish or sinful behavior. That's when you run into trouble. :)
dear tkp,
I am sorry about your friend's husband.
A Harding student I taught also died in Iraq.
Send me your address and I will get you a case of diet Coke.
bwr
Post a Comment
« Home