If you embarked upon a quest to discover the role of women in American society today, you would find many answers: career-women, mothers, wives, single, married, sisters, daughters, grandmothers, artists, coaches, teachers, and entrepreneurs to name just a small portion. As time marches on, women have taken on many additional roles to the traditional gender roles of past eras. Many women today are left striving to be super-mom, juggling the conflicting expectations of career and motherhood. In fact, 70% of women in the United States in 2005 worked outside the home, juggling the demanding expectations of industry and family life which can be overwhelming.
According to a survey conducted of 1,124 mothers employed full time, 25% are dissatistfied with their work-life balance and 23% report that they missed three or more significant events in their child’s life in the last year, 44% reported they would take a pay cut to spend more time with their kids.
The newest media label for highly educated, professionals who are also mothers is “Alpha Mom.” The Washington Post describes her, “She wields a BlackBerry in one hand, an additional cell phone in the other, and when she’s not sitting behind the wheel of her SUV (a Hummer fits the image nicely), she’s parked in front of her laptop doing “consumer research” (aka shopping).
The responses of women feeling torn and dissatisfied trying to balance home and life comes as no surprise. In fact, it begs the question, are we better off with a dual focus? Has feminism (You’ve come along way, baby!) brought us to a more peaceful and fulfilled place in the lives of our families? Pondering these questions often leads to the confusion for today’s modern Christian women, because the biblical perspective goes against the grain of what society currently expects.
The Bible provides both a challenging and balanced approach for gender roles, both male and female. Evidence of these gender roles are more than societal norms, they are seen in the very first creation of life. He created them, male and female, with complementary roles and specific purposes and designs in all areas. God’s master plan had balance and harmony in the first family. In his essay, Male & Female Equality & Male Headship, Raymond C. Ortlund, Jr. explains:
But the very fact that God created human beings in the dual modality of male and female cautions us against an unqualified equation of the two sexes. This profound and beautiful distinction, which some belittle as “a matter of mere anatomy,” is not a biological triviality or accident. It is God who wants men to be men and women to be women; and He can teach us the meaning of each, if we want to be taught.
When we examine the meaning of what God’s design is for women, it becomes clear that women have the equal calling of serving with a focus on home and family. Women are built physically as nurtures of life. Moreover, the woman praised as virtuous in Proverbs 31 is commended for watching over the affairs of her home, and working eagerly with her hands and mind inside and outside to help her family prosper. However, the main focus of her efforts is trained on managing her household, not her career.
Paul instructs older women to teach younger women how to love their husbands and children, and how to be homemakers. The bible is clear that God’s role for women is to be helpers and nurturers of life. As Christian women, we need to remember our divine calling, not to be alpha-mothers, or dazzling career women, or burnt-out housewives. Our calling is greater; we are to be the caretakers of all that is cherished in family life and home. We may need to work and be helpers outside of the home, but at least we can rest assured and know where our focus lies. We don’t have to be adrift in the sea of self-doubt, guilt, or depression when we embrace God’s call on our lives as women—we triumph! Home is where our hearts should return. Here are some resources for encouragement that have encouraged me to focus my heart in the right direction:
You seem to presuppose that a woman will have children. Do you think this is a biblical requirement?
I would say it is. Obviously, God chooses (both in Biblical times and today) to make some women barren. However, if a woman marries, she should attempt to have children as much as it is in her power to do so. Only in the last century has procreation been so removed from sex.
Darius, I think that was a reaction to sex being removed from procreation.
“However, if a woman marries, she should attempt to have children as much as it is in her power to do so.”
Why? The only biblical justification for this is the commandment to multiply and fill the earth, which we’ve done. I know it’s a moot point, because most people want to have children anyway.
We are not done multiplying and filling the earth. In some countries like India perhaps, but, if you’re read some Mark Steyn or any other demographic bore, you know that most developed countries are well below birth rate replacement levels (Russia, for example, will see its population halve in about 50 years), which means numerous problems for the future. For one, since so many countries have become social security and welfare states, who pays for social security where most of the population is retired? And who does the work to maintain our way of life if everyone is too elderly to do the work? Not to mention the changes to a society that is 70% over the age of 55, which is soon to be the case in Japan, with their birthrates of 1.1 children per woman and astronomical suicide rates among their youth. America is still a ways off from the demographic problems that Europe, Russia, Japan, and China now face, but it’s coming.
“We are not done multiplying and filling the earth.”
I disagree. We’ve spread across the globe. Unless you think we need to establish cities in Antarctica or under the ocean, there isn’t anywhere left to go. We’ve already filled the earth. All we’re doing now is making it more crowded. Or do you think we need a certain population density in every habitable continent and island before God signs off and says we’re finished?
I don’t think there is a specific number or density that we are called to, just to continue to have children and keep the earth populated. As I already mentioned, many countries are in serious danger of going, or already have gone, into a population death spiral. It is a common misconception that populations are easy to maintain, hard to slow down, nearly impossible to reduce. Quite the opposite, as this century has shown us. And history hasn’t been kind to societies that enter the population death spiral, since they tend to not pull out of it. Japan and Russia are foregone conclusions… today, on an island of 20,000 people, their ONLY maternity ward is only open on Mondays, that’s how few babies they are having. So, it would seem, that God’s injunction to be fruitful and multiply is still useful for today.
“I don’t think there is a specific number or density that we are called to, just to continue to have children and keep the earth populated.”
That seems reasonable enough. However, for that to happen, not everyone needs to have children. What is the proper role for women who don’t have children?
convents
I am not at all trying to imply that all women must become mothers and have children. Women who do not physically care for/birth their own children can certainly fulfill their “commission” as women by helping to nurture other people’s children.
**grrr–I wrote this post hours ago and my internet quit. I’ll try again.**
It is hard to know what God really had in mind when he said to multiply and fill the earth. Somehow I doubt it was an absolute figure :eyeroll:
Sadie, great article. I checked out the links at the end. It seems if Proverbs 31 were written today “blogging words of encouragement” might be on the list!
I have many thoughts on this topic; I guess I’ll start with the topic of having children. I don’t think a couple is necessarily sinning if they choose not to have children; one would have to look at their motives. For instance, I wouldn’t criticize them for not having children if their motives were something like “we think the world is too full already, so we’ll adopt a pile of kids instead” or their may be health issues to consider, including passing on genetic problems, so they adopt a pile of kids instead.
On the other hand, I would not look so favorably at couples who don’t have children because they “couldn’t afford it” or they are “too busy.” I pretty much see those as selfish reasons.
I stress the adoption thing because I have observed, as Jew pointed out, that most people do want to have children, but I think the point is loving and nurturing children, not necessarily adding to the population. I don’t know if it is biology or psychology, but the drive to reproduce is indeed a strong one (just look at the animal world), but for humans, I think that drive can be satisfied with adopting kids just as well as having one’s own.
I think we need to talk about how unmarried women fit into the picture, because the picture is a bit different for them. But I’ve said enough for the moment.
BTW, where is Arenel?–she could contribute to this blog.
OK. So women don’t necessarily need to have children (although most will) but they do need to work with children in some capacity?
There is a great chapter in the book Biblical Womanhood in the Home, that addresses the question of how single women can participate in developing their serving and nurturing roles. It starts on page 21, and the author, Carolyn Mahoney makes a great point:
“As women, we are created to be life-bearers. Our bodies have
been designed with the ability to mother—to receive, carry, and bear
young. In fact, our bodies prepare themselves repeatedly to conceive
and bear young. We express our femininity by gratefully embracing
every stage of child-bearing, receiving and nurturing each child as a gracious gift from God.
In no way does this exclude single women. As Elisabeth Elliot
reminds us, a single woman may mother many children: “She can having children! She may be a spiritual mother, as was Amy Carmichael, by
the offering of her singleness, transformed for the good of far morechildren than a natural mother may produce. All is received and made holy by the One to whom it is offered.” Single and childless married women alike can express their femininity by nurturing other people’s children. When you baby-sit, you are giving expression to your femininity. When you take an interest and reach out to other people’s children, you are displaying your Godgiven femininity. When you tutor children or sponsor a needy child internationally or volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center or build relationships
with your nieces or nephews, you are bearing fruit in this
area. I give thanks to God for all the single women in my life and forthe countless times they have cared for my children, loving them as though they were their very own. We mothers want to say thank you
for their doing that, for their blessing us in that way. It means so much to us, and we are grateful to them. But they are doing more than blessing us; they are honoring God by selflessly investing in the young lives around them.”
whoops! their –> there
I have a lot of sympathy for women, young and older, who are not married but wish they were. Yes, convents solve the problem for a few not named Maria (anybody like musicals?), but for many there is a struggle to fit in. They are encouraged to get educated and get a job, and then, when they do, many wish they were home with kids anyway.
Sometimes I wonder how much the feminist movement has subtly affected the expectations for Christian women. Sure, they reject radical feminism, but meeting a Christian prince charming, getting married, having kids, and living happily ever after just doesn’t seem to happen to a lot of women these days. Is that because God’s plan has changed? Is it because society’s expectations have changed? Is it because of financial pressures? Is it because men have been changed by the feminist movement? The ever-increasing average age of marriage indicates something is going on.
“Meeting a Christian prince charming, getting married, having kids, and living happily ever after just doesn’t seem to happen to a lot of women these days.”
I don’t know, I see it happening quite a bit. But people have changed. I browsed through BustedHalo.com (I noticed it on a Google ad, I think) and notice an article about the changes in what men and women are looking for in a spouse. Compared to 60 years ago, both men and women are much more interested in a nebulous and ill-defined thing called love, and far less concerned with dependability and emotional stability.
I think most christian women today work and/or earn a professional degree because we live in a soceity where two incomes is almost a necessity, and also because there is security in it. I know for myself, that I can rest assured that if my husband died, I would be able to provide for myself and my family. This is just common sense for me, especially because I work in a field that can accomodate me when I do choose to have a family.
Additionally, yes, the feminist movement has affected both men and women’s views of gender roles. Without going overboard in my explanation (I can talk for hours on the subject, just ask my husband), I think that both men and women need to carefully study God’s plan for their lives and work towards those expectations in a counter-revolution to what society expects. Men need to be leaders in the home/family and women need to be helpers in the home/family. These biblical characterisitcs are often not present in either christian men or women, which I think effects the ability to find a mate and then to stay married. Our society does little to equip men and women for a healthy marriage. The question then becomes, why has the church been so effected by cultural feminism?
“both men and women are much more interested in a nebulous and ill-defined thing called love, and far less concerned with dependability and emotional stability.”
Ah, TV and movies come to bite us in the rear.
good points about other options than biological mothering. I wasn’t saying that it’s a sin to not have a child if physically and relationally possible. Jew and Thainamu, good comments regarding adoption, mentoring, etc. Adoption/foster care is another legitimate way to be fruitful and multiply, since taking care of kids who have no one else will help them to be fruitful and multiply themselves (much less survive).
This comment doesn’t directly relate to any of the previous ones, but my favorite anecdote when it comes to complementarians vs. egalitarians is what I heard an elderly gentleman say in church one Sunday: How could I view my wife as equal to me? To do that, I’d have to take her off the pedestal. (And he wasn’t being sarcastic!)
You shouldn’t leave women on pedestals. They could fall and hurt themselves.
I enjoyed reading your article! I know that I have found peace with my role in my marriage as a helpmate. Everyone is unique and every marriage is unique, too. To be a helpmate to your spouse & family requires putting the needs of the family as a priority. This has been expressed in various ways that are often non-traditional. I have worked while my husband was unemployed and in school, and am currently still the primary income. My husband has no issue with this because this was/is an expression of my role as a helpmate. His career as an educator will require me to work part-time, even when we have children, but I know that as long as I am doing what God desires for me, and fulfilling my role as a help-mate to my spouse, the balance of our giftings will keep our marraige healthy. My necessity to work will not be for my own selfish means, or to prove a point, or to avoid my responsibilities, but will be for my family. As you quote from Ortlund, Jr: “It is God who wants men to be men and women to be women; and He can teach us the meaning of each, if we want to be taught”. My role as a helpmate could be a struggle, but it is better to be humble and be blessed by how rewarding and fulfilling that role can be.