Captivating, Chapter Three - Haunted By A Question

Eve – What Happened?

The beginning of chapter three talks about a variety of struggles faced by women. The authors ask “Why do so few women have anything close to a life of romance?” (44). While I do understand that they are talking about the general disappointment many feel regarding their lives, I do wish to point out a possible cause for women not having “anything close to a life of romance”: many women are sitting around waiting for their knight in shining armor to swoop in and rescue them from their boring existence and take them on magical adventures. And while these women are sitting and waiting they are missing out on many great opportunities to live life by themselves – as well as to seek out that partner in their life instead of passively waiting.

The authors continue to talk about how many women feel in saying “And women are tired. We are drained…the weariness of women comes from lives that are crammed with routine, with chores, with hundreds of demands…. We struggle to know if we matter at all” (44-45). The authors do a good job of acknowledging a lot of feelings many women experience in day to day life. (it is worth noting that many of the feelings of weariness and insignificance are faced by men and women alike, it is not unique or special to women)

The authors attempt to make a connection between the insecurity many women feel with Eve. But what about Eve… I cannot figure out that part of their argument. They say “Every woman is haunted by Eve in the core of her being. She knows, if only when she passes a mirror, that she is not what she was meant to be” (46). While I agree many women may feel insufficient in this manner, I do not see what this has to do with Eve and the authors fail to explain this statement they make.

Next the authors write “You see, every little girl-and every little boy- is asking one fundamental question. But they are very different questions…[the boy] was made in the image of a warrior God. Nearly all a man does is fueled by his search for validation.” (46) As I had mentioned in regards to last chapters statement about the statement previously made about the struggle with self-worth for women versus men that “there is something deeper to this struggle for women, and far more universal.” (21) I would challenge the authors to explain how they can simultaneously claim that “nearly all a man does is fueled by his search for validation” (46) and “there is something deeper to this struggle for women” (21) as the two clearly contradict themselves. I think the REAL point is that the struggle with self-worth is one common to men AND women for we are all HUMAN first, and separated by gender SECOND. Also, how is it that men were made in the image of a different God (a “warrior God”) than women, if we were all made in the image of the same God?

The Fall of Eve

The authors quote Genesis 3:1-6 to describe what happened in the fall of creation. They argue that Eve sinned because she did not trust God’s heart to take care of her. John again quotes himself from Wild at Heart in saying this of Adam allowing Even to sin… “He won’t risk, he won’t fight and he won’t rescue Eve…he denied his very nature and went passive.” (48) I have quite a few issues with this statement. First, if Adam’s nature is to be an active warrior (as previously described in pages 36-37 of the last chapter), then why did God not mention that in Genesis 2 when he provided Adam with the rules of Earth – that being simply to not to eat of the tree? Or, in Genesis 1:28-30 where it says of man and woman, “God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground." Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.” These commands were given to BOTH Adam and Eve, they were given equal authority over the earth, and there was no mention of anyone’s need to be a warrior or protect anyone. Nowhere prior to the fall does it say anything about anyone being assertive over anyone. So why do the authors believe that Adam “denied his very nature and went passive” when we have no reason to believe that that is contrary to his nature, or contrary to how he was commanded to live? Second, if Adam’s nature and role was to be Eve’s protector, why is the first sin committed Eve eating of the fruit, NOT Adam being passive?

Following the quoting of Wild at Heart the authors continue on the topic of man’s passivity in saying “Men, just when we need them to come through for us…check out. They disappear, go silent and passive. “He won’t talk to me,” is many a woman’s lament.” (48) I find it ironic that they can simultaneously claim that WOMEN are by nature more relational than men, but can allow women to complain that men won’t talk. Maybe this woman’s man isn’t talking to her because he’s being told by John Eldredge that a woman’s role is to be relational, and not a man’s!

The Curse

At this point the authors quote Genesis 3:16-18 and begin to talk about the “curse” that they believe God put on man and woman. However, as I read these verses I see something different… “To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.”

I do not see any mentioning of “curse” in regards to woman. God says “I will make…” but he does not say “I curse you” or “cursed is...” in the way he curses the ground or he curses the serpent in the portion not quoted. The authors interpret these verses as follows “Woman is cursed with loneliness (relational heartache), with the urge to control (especially her man), and with the dominance of men (which is not how things are meant to be and we are not saying it is a good thing – it is a fruit of the Fall and a sad fact of history)” (50)

First, the belief that woman is “cursed” is not within the text. God is stating the consequences for their sin; he is not saying “I curse you”. He is not saying “this is how the world should be”, he is saying “as a result of your sin, this is the way the world will now exist”. Second, their interpretation of the “curse” includes that woman is cursed “with the urge to control”. However, that interpretation isn’t supported by the Biblical text. The conjunctive “and” suggests that “desire” leads or is related to the domination…a better interpretation is that the woman’s desire for her husband will dominate her and lead to domination by her husband. The Message interprets this verse to say “You’ll want to please your husband, but he’ll lord it over you” which puts a drastically different spin on the use of the word “desire”. In this verse the authors interpret “desire” to mean “urge to control” rather than the other (more likely) possibility that it means desire such as longing, craving, want. How often in your day-to-day life do you interpret “desire” to mean “control”? If you’re reading a poem in which a lover speaks of his desire for his love, we take that to be a positive thing, a loving them…yet this use of desire is interpreted by the authors in a drastically different light!

It is crucial to highlight what the authors say about women being dominated by men, “(which is not how things are meant to be and we are not saying it is a good thing – it is a fruit of the Fall and a sad fact of history)” (50). They make an excellent point here. Women are not MEANT to be dominated, as has been so true throughout time. It can be seen throughout most of time and within most cultures that women are treated as second class citizens, as property, as inferior beings. There is nothing in the story of creation from which to presume that men are to be dominant over women – to be the leaders of women. God appoints man and woman together to rule over the animals, but at no point does God tell Adam that he is to rule over Eve.

The problem that comes with the idea that women want to “control” their husbands is that women will think they need to become more and more passive and please their husbands which will actually make the problem worse…women are dominated because they desire their husband too much, so trying harder to do so will only increase the domination!

The last passage of this section of the chapter says, “When a man goes bad, as every man has in some way gone bad after the fall, what is most deeply marred is his strength. He either becomes a passive, weak man – strength surrendered – or a violent, driven man – strength unglued. When a woman falls from grace, what is most deeply marred is her tender vulnerability, beauty that invites life. She becomes dominating, controlling woman – or a desolate, needy, mousy woman.” (50) So…what the authors are really trying to say is that when people go bad, people become either passive/weak or violent/controlling, it is the same for men and women, they just use different words to say what is happening. The authors are looking at the same situation but seeing it how they want to see it, so it fits within their construction of how they believe the world is supposed to be. This all goes back to the fact that men and woman really aren’t as different as we’re told they are. (again, I am NOT saying there are no differences!)

Dominating Women

Several pages are devoted to describing the “dominating woman” as someone who “is in charge…there is nothing merciful about her, nothing tender and certainly nothing vulnerable. She has forsaken essential aspects of her femininity.” (51) The authors use several movie references to describe what they believe a dominating woman looks like, and continue to make lists of the traits a woman is supposed to have by indicating what ones this woman has forsaken.

One things that has always bothered me is the way in which when a woman gets married she suddenly loses her identity, and even her own name. And I’m not talking about a woman changing her last name; I’m talking about a woman calling herself “Mrs. John Dashwood” (51). This is the woman I believe has forsaken her femininity, for she has traded her own name to fall beneath her husband, becoming invisible, completely dependent upon him for who she is.

The authors argue that “sure, a calculating, heartless man makes a villain. But somehow it’s even worse when she’s a woman.” (52) Why is this? Well, the authors do not give any reason or explanation for their irrational statement. To me it seems that the authors are insulting women for no reason at all, which is interesting because at many other times in the book they appear to exalt women above all else.

Next comes another attempt by the authors to pass their own beliefs for something that is Biblical when they say “but beneath it all, behind it all, is a simple truth: women dominate and control because they fear vulnerability” (52) and follow this up with quoting Romans 14:23 to say “Whatever is not from faith is sin." It is dangerous for the authors to quote an unrelated Bible verse in an attempt to make inappropriate connections it seem as if the Bible supports their assumptions about how all women act and feel.

The authors say “What we are saying is that far too many women forfeit their femininity in order to feel safe and in control. Their strength feels more masculine than feminine. There is nothing inviting or alluring, nothing tender or merciful about them.” (52) What is the difference between masculine and feminine strength? Do the authors realize that are yet again providing a list of traits that their readers are going to assume they must display? What are men violating when they fear vulnerability? Many men are petrified of vulnerability because they’ve never learned, never been allowed to express themselves but through strength and violence.

Now, much of what is said throughout this section I feel is generally true and accurate, if the authors would take out their attempts to connect it to the Bible, allow it to be gender neutral and not attempt to speak for every woman.

Desolate Women

Next the authors talk about their opposite of a dominating woman, a desolate woman. They describe her as “desolate, needy, far too vulnerable” (53). On pages 54-55 Stasi talks about women who hide because they are afraid, quoting Genesis 3:10 that says “I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid” which I find to be quite ironic because that verse is spoken by a MAN, not a woman, but is used to support their belief that this is a behavior exhibited by woman.

Furthermore, the authors say of these desolate woman, “We relinquish major decisions to others.” (56) Are they surprised that women act this way? I am surprised when women DON’T act in that manner because if she has been raised in a Christian home or attended church for any amount of time, it is very likely that it has been indoctrinated into her that as a woman she is not capable of making proper decision on her own, in fact, she is NOT ALLOWED to make decisions and must relinquish those to her husband, to her father, to her pastor – to any man because he is wiser and better able to make decisions by default simply because he is a man. The church teaches passivity, the church produces desolate woman and pronounces them good.

Now again, as with the section on dominating women, this section has some interesting insights and does a good job of describing the manner in which many woman live at times.

I spent many years on the “desolate” side of things. I was taught that as a female in the church I would always be second best to the men, and so I accepted that my only roles to fill would be to bake pies, to teach Sunday school or work in the nursery. For whatever reason, I for many years hated making big decisions. I’m not sure when or why or what, but I remember only applying to one college because I didn’t want to have to choose between two. (luckily I was accepted!) Once in college, I spent even more time with individuals who firmly believed that a woman’s role was that of passivity – a woman could not initiate even a friendship with a man, and CERTAINLY not romantic relationships. I was further taught that once married a woman’s role was to be a helper, to be fully submissive and allow the husband to make all the decisions, even if they were BAD decisions, I was to be supportive of that. I was even taught that these role distinctions were to be demonstrated in friendships and dating relationships.

And it was easy, being passive. It was safe. I didn’t realize how terrified I was of being assertive, of standing up for myself – of making a simple decision, for quite some time. I remember a specific time shortly after Ryan and I were engaged in which we were returning home from church on a Sunday morning and he asked if I wanted to go cook lunch at his house or at my house. I said “I don’t care” which was my typical response when he asked my opinion on something – and for the most part it was true that I did not have any preference. Ryan continued to ask what I wanted to do, and left the decision up to me because he wanted my input. We ended up sitting in the care for quite some time as I cried, thoroughly terrified at the thought of having to think and act for myself. “This isn’t what a girl is supposed to do! He’s supposed to do everything for me” is what a part of me was saying.

I am so very, very grateful for the patience that Ryan has shown to me, especially in the months leading up to our marriage. He was so supportive and encouraging to me, empowering me to stand up for myself in situations in which I was being treated poorly and I wanted to back down and let it all continue. He pushed me to share my opinion on things that I didn’t think it could possibly matter. In the process of learning how to make decisions, we even initiated a schedule for what days I would make decisions and what days he would so I could practice intentionally.

I am no longer stuck in the desolate land of passivity which the modern church so often sends women as I was fortunate enough to find Ryan who loves me enough to allow me to not just exist in our relationship but be an equal participant, who daily lives out the promise within our declaration on our wedding day to “love [me] as a person, respect [me] as an equal, submit [himself] to [me] as is fitting in the Lord” rather than lord over me as the church would not only permit but encourage him to do.