I’ve recently begun speaking out as a feminist. Perhaps surprisingly, the most pushback I’ve received (so far) has been from other women.

Conservative Christian women, mostly.

When one of my conservative female friends praised Eve in Exile, a book that defends traditional roles, I knew I needed to read this book to better understand those women who disagree with me.

And boy, this book was a ride.

Has Eve in Exile convinced me to reject feminism and embrace traditional gender roles? Resoundingly and emphatically, no.

But, it did accomplish one thing: It helped me understand those who think differently. So I’m glad for that.

Let’s unpack this book a little bit at a time.

Some women do want gender roles

Judging by the many positive reviews, it’s clear that Eve in Exile is resonating with some women.

What does this tell me?

It says that some women truly do long for the traditional picture of stay-at-home motherhood, ultra femininity, and even the conservative family structure with the husband taking the helm. Understandably, these women feel uncomfortable with modern feminism, and even looked down upon by our culture at large.

This saddens me, and demonstrates a failure on the part of third-wave feminists to effectively achieve our primary goal:

Honoring and protecting the choices and preferences of all women, including stay-at-home, non-career mothers.

This lifestyle is as dignified and important as any, which should go without saying. We need to do a better job at communicating this to women who want traditional roles: Their preferences here are valid and beautiful and deserve celebration.

We need to do a better job at communicating this to women who want traditional roles: Their preferences here are valid and beautiful and deserve celebration.

Perhaps that is why so many conservative readers love this book, because that’s exactly what it teaches. The author does a wonderful job at injecting meaning and glory into the life of the housewife, which I can imagine feels deeply validating, liberating, and inspiring to those who identify with such a calling.

But this, I’m afraid, is where my positive words for this book end.

Because this is

not

all

women.

Gender roles don’t work for everyone

The model of marriage she describes, with men at the head, and women centering their lives around the home, is not something I, personally, could ever willingly submit to. Without will, submission becomes slavery.

And yes, I use that strong word intentionally. Just reading the author’s descriptions of so-called “Godly/Biblical womanhood” is physically stressful for me, because of how deeply it goes against my nature.

Funny how that’s the whole basis of her argument (on top of “the Bible says so”): That this is women’s nature. Maybe it is for some women that truly identify with, and find fulfillment in, the submissive helper role.

But even with her emphasis on the inherent equality of men and women, this role is still abhorrent to me. It has been ever since I first encountered it a decade ago, as an adolescent, while reading an even worse book called So Much More (the reading of which caused psychological damage that took years to undo).

I’d be willing to guess this is similar to the reason many women become feminists: Our given gender role just doesn’t work for us.

What’s the evidence?

The author’s model of womanhood is especially unimpressive since (and this is where I’ll loose a lot of conservative Christians) her only arguments for that model are from the Bible. An ancient text written in a different time for different people in different cultures.

Sorry, but that’s not a sufficiently convincing way to prove that your model of womanhood is universally true… especially for those of us who fundamentally do not identify with it. And especially more for those of us who are more convinced by empirical evidence than by alleged revelation.

I’m not against revelation; only when it conflicts with empirical evidence. Or with basic human decency, which I feel is under threat by the disturbing arguments of this book.

Again, many women are in fact liberated by this traditional view of womanhood. Good for them. But many others feel suffocated by it, no matter how nicely one tries to spruce it up. There’s simply no way you can present “submission to husbands” without making me want to gag. Sorry, it’s not going to happen.

The dark history of feminism?

Now, there is another major aspect to this book that I need to address: And that is her take on the history of feminism, and why, to her understanding, Christians should not be a part of it.

A few things.

First, I admit that I’m not deeply educated on the history of feminism… yet. Her description of its major events and key players felt overly simplistic to me, but I’m curious to explore the subject more and see if that is or is not the case.

Either way, I agree with her that feminism appears to have some disgusting roots. (For example, Mary Shelley having an affair with a married man in the name of “free love”, which ended with that man’s wife committing suicide? NOT. OKAY.) And certainly there are aspects of feminism I don’t align with, such as its take on abortion.

But this is where the author and I don’t agree: You do not have to align with everything in a movement in order to participate in it.

If that were the case, I wouldn’t be a Christian, frankly, because there are plenty of Christian teachings and denominations that I disagree with. But it’s the unifying heart and soul of Christianity I connect with.

It’s the same with feminism. Heck, feminists frequently disagree with each other. That’s good and healthy for any movement! You don’t want groupthink; you want a group of people who challenge each other, who sharpen each other like iron, who grow and improve together. You need a variety of perspectives and opinions to do that. Conflicting ideas can and should coexist, as long as everyone is united around a core goal (full gender equality).

Third wave feminism has done the best at this. You might even say that the core goal of third wave feminism is to incorporate the full breadth of women’s perspectives and experiences, including those that the author brings up here.

Third wave feminism includes everyone

This brings me full circle, and to what I believe is the book’s largest weakness: The author failed to fully research modern feminism. On the back cover, it says: “Today, Third-Wave feminists stand firmly for nobody’s quite sure what.” But a few minutes of Googling will show that’s not the case; third wave feminism does have clear goals.

In fact, most of her grievances with feminism seem to be with second wave mentalities, which modern feminists admit were a bit of an extreme pendulum swing. There was a sense of separation from motherhood and reproductive biology, looking down on homemaking, and a departing from femininity.

But third wave feminism is trying to bring us to a healthy balance …

One where women are enabled to be mothers and have passions and vocations.

One where women have the freedom and dignity to choose careers, or a stay-at-home lifestyle, or a hybrid of both, and that none of these choices would be looked down upon.

One where the full breadth of femininity is embraced and praised, from ultra-femme ladies who love makeup and dresses, to tomboys and sports lovers, from quiet, submissive followers to bold, natural leaders, and everyone and everything in between.

Third wave feminism is, among other things, about accepting that there is more than one way to be a woman, and that all of our various personalities, passions, and gifts are good, valid, and encouraged.

A model of oppression

What disturbs me about this book isn’t that women would want the model of womanhood described in these pages. If it brings you meaning, purpose, and fulfillment in life, then by all means, do it! Be the lovely, submissive, glorifying woman that you feel called to be.

What disturbs me is this utterly false assertion that every woman must and should align with this.

I am deeply concerned for young girls reading this book, just like when thirteen-year-old me read So Much More, who will have their true calling and potential stifled by an arbitrary formula that, rather than liberating them, will rob them of their confidence, autonomy, and ability to think and dream for themselves.

I am concerned for the many girls who should be doctors or scientists or politicians or soldiers or astronauts, those who are meant to change the world, who are held back tragically because they thought those roles were for men.

The author is right to say that the home is just as important as the career world, but she is wrong to think that rigidly enforced, unnecessary gender roles are still the answer. They’re not. The traditional family has evolved; it has not fallen apart. There are stay-at-home dads, and parents who work from home, and adults who choose not to have children because… they don’t want to. (There are 7 billion people in the world. We’re fine on babies.) There’s more than one way to do this.

The traditional family has evolved; it has not fallen apart.

Yes, our society prospers when everyone is fulfilling their truest, best role. But those roles are not dependent on gender. Every human being is unique. And when you try to force people into roles they were not designed for, you don’t create freedom.

You create oppression.

And that is exactly what this kind of theology has a history of doing.

Image credits: Pixabay