Monday, April 17, 2006


You look absolutely lovely today!

Oh wait, this post is about complementarianism, not complimentarianism ;).

Over the past several days I've mentally been drafting a post on complementarianism, but then I found that Lanier saved me the trouble with her thoughtful post on the YLCF blog. Last week the YLCF bloggers wrote a number of articles on masculinity and femininity, and I think Lanier's especially is very well done. She addresses the topic at hand quite well with far fewer words than I would ;). Here is a tidbit:

These days the striking and beautiful differences between male and female are treated as abnormalities; disfigurements on the face of an otherwise completely neutral and genderless society. Enemies of God’s design have worked tirelessly to shame these distinctions into obscurity, to the point that many growing up now have no reason to suspect that the differences have ever existed at all. It’s no wonder that the woman roused to her innate calling to be a woman is confronted with a confusing mess of conflicting messages. It grieves me to no end to consider all of the girls and young ladies out there who have been immobilized in their awakening quest towards true womanhood by the pervasive and pernicious idea that there is no such thing.

I encourage you to read her post in its entirety.

*Footnote: In a comment to her post, Lanier clarifies one of her comments - His design is a culture of men and women secure in their distinctions and incomplete without each other. Fulfilled and yet unfulfilled. She explains that she was speaking of the human race as a whole, not meaning that unmarried individuals are unfulfilled. . .


Anna Naomi said...

They are doing really good posts over at Young Ladies Christian Fellowship right now! I enjoyed this one a lot!

The Happy Feminist said...

I remain grateful to this day that I was free to develop my own individual talents and strengths without regard to any expectations one way or the other based on sex. My husband and I certainly complement each other -- but not in terms of traditional male and female characteristics or roles but in terms of our individual strenghts and weaknesses and the roles that best suit us as individuals.

Sure, my husband likes watching professional sports while I read Jane Austen. But at the same time, I am extremely ambitious and competitive whereas he is more of a homebody and a nurturer. I joke a lot that he is "in touch with his feminine side" but the reality is that we are both comfortable with our strengths and preferences regardless of how they fit in to traditional gender norms. I don't think there is much to be gained by forcing people into narrow categories, whether that's to push traditional femininity onto girls or to push them away from traditional femininity.

Susan said...

Well, as you doubtless know, HF, I do disagree with you quite a bit concerning gender roles, but I don't mind you offering your opinion :). I appreciate your very civil way of disagreeing with me, when such times arise.