I haven’t always been a raging feminist. OK, let’s be real. I’m probably still not exactly a raging feminist, although I do talk pretty big. I spent a large part of my early adulthood
proclaiming that I would be completely happy if I was barefoot and pregnant for
the rest of my life, and then I actually brought five people into the world to
prove it. And I stayed home with
them. And I homeschooled them. And I bake awesome desserts and make 21
cheese mac & cheese and homemade pizza and fried chicken from scratch. I like to scrapbook. Crafts are fun. Go ahead left leaning friends, shame me if
you have to. But you might want to read
the rest of this, first.
When God called me to the traditionally male
dominated vocational field of theology, I was actually a little bit blown away. In addition to my earlier tendency to fit neatly
into conventionally female roles, this is probably the part where I should
admit that I had to drop out of my high school speech class, because it literally made me sick, and I took my
general ed. speech requirement for my undergraduate degree online.
So let me get this straight, God… you want me to
preach… and speak… and teach? You want
me to spend the rest of my life standing up in front of groups of people and
making words come out of my mouth? OK,
whatever. Who am I to say no? Bring it on…
Oh, friends… never say that. The whole, “bring it on,” thing… It sounds so cool and tough and strong, but
it’s overrated. You have no idea what
you’re getting yourself into! I promise.
Some time back, I wrote a post about some of the
unique challenges with which I think female theologians come into contact. It can be found here. At the time, I thought I had solved the
awkward problem surrounding the Billy Graham Rule. You’re going to have male colleagues and
friends, I said. You’re going to have
lots of male colleagues and friends, I said.
Be cautious, but don’t worry about it too much, I said, because surely everybody
‘gets’ this. We’re all adults. In the world of theology, I would hope that
at least most of us are adults who are trying our very best to serve Jesus and
live holy lives. We can be friends. It will be OK.
I recently ran across a couple of articles that I
thought were excellent examples supporting this line of thinking. They can be found here:
I also recently attended a conference that was
specifically geared toward women in ministry leadership. While it was incredibly refreshing to sit
around a table with other female pastors, it was also something of a relief to
hear them talk about the male colleagues, friends, and mentors in their lives. No fear was expressed. Not one person said something like, “I am so
afraid of meeting alone with a male colleague, because I might be tempted.” Not… one…
I started to think to myself, “Maybe we have finally
turned the corner,” but I wasn’t certain.
Not yet. I like research, so I thought
to myself, “Maybe I should just take an informal survey.” In hindsight, perhaps I should have left well
enough alone and gone on living in my happy little bubble where men and women
both recognize the value of friendship and do not worry about the drastic
consequences a cup of coffee might bring.
When asked about the Billy Graham Rule, and
interactions with male colleagues, these are some things I heard from women
(whose names are being kept confidential):
“It
would make it nearly impossible for me to do my job if I had to follow this
rule.”
“I believe my voice in the workplace
was limited by not being involved in these ‘unofficial’ meetings.”
“If
I couldn't have those interactions there is no way I could be anywhere near as
successful in my job/workforce.”
“The
wife of one of my male colleagues made a comment after a few weeks that (my
colleague) and I were a very asexual sort of team.”
“It's
almost like they don't see me as a woman and it makes it easier to be
successful.”
“What
does it say about my character, my Christian witness, that I can't be trusted
to have an appropriate conversation/interaction with a man whether I am alone
or in public? I have found myself in conversations alone with women that are
more uncomfortable than 95% of those I've had with men.”
“I was the victim of abuse in ministry
settings and blamed myself… I felt that the rule protected men from me.”
Holy… Cow…
I almost
threw in the towel on this piece after all of that, and maybe I should
have. But I didn’t.
Interestingly,
not one single woman I spoke to took someone with her when meeting with a man,
because she felt unsafe. I might come back to that.
When asked about the Billy Graham Rule, and
interactions with female colleagues, these are some things I heard from men
(whose names are also being kept confidential):
“I
saw the rules largely as a way of being ‘above reproach.’"
“Men
fall into that trap much more often than women.”
“It kept us from being in situations
where people could speculate about what might be happening behind closed doors.”
“It’s
OK to break the rule in a crisis.”
“I
don’t want to be emotionally intimate with anyone other than my wife.”
“I'm
not sure this is a hill I want to die on these days, but I don't necessarily
disagree with this approach.”
In everyone’s defense, I’m pretty sure we have a
serious communication problem.
My assessment here is that we see men sharing
concern over temptation, general public perception, and the potential for
immoral behavior. Even though some of
the conversations were frustrating (admittedly, I had to step away on a couple
of occasions, because it was making me pretty hot—and not in a tempting kind of
way), I can see why they don’t want to die on that hill.
Unfortunately, women are dying on the hill, because we’re looking at this from a
completely different perspective. We’re
not even considering temptation and moral failure (although I am going to say something more about
that in a second, here)! The vast
majority of us are just considering how we can best do our jobs and maybe…
maybe… crack the glass ceiling!
Realistically, I think most women who work in male dominated fields want
to be able to have the same conversations with their male colleagues that they
would have with female colleagues, and they want their male colleagues to have
the same level of friendship/attachment with them that male colleagues have
with one another (not to be confused
with the same level of intimacy they have with their wives or girlfriends or
whatever). That sounds fine to me,
completely appropriate, but the problem comes in when people don't seem to
understand the principles of mixed gender, platonic relationships. And that’s a real thing, friends. True story.
Now, let’s touch on temptation for a moment.
I was actually really disturbed by the one quote, “Men fall into that trap much
more often than women.”
I feel very certain of a couple of
things. First, men do not fall into that trap much more often
than women, because most of the time there must be a woman involved for a man to fall into that trap (and
vice versa)! Infidelity is not generally
happening without the involvement of (at least) two people. This brings me to the second thing of which I
am sure. I did not interview any rapists for this piece. What naturally follows is that in order to
have a problem, at all, we have to have two willing parties. The chances of this are infinitesimally low.
There are a lot of reasons for
this, and without aiming to destroy anyone’s self esteem here,
I think if everyone took just a moment to be slightly self-deprecating, we
would realize that most of us are not attractive enough to be home wreckers!
I’ll go first.
I am in my mid-thirties (OK, pushing late thirties, but humor me), the
mother of five children (totally takes a toll on the body and mind), overweight, Type A, suffering from adult onset acne, avid
reader of YA fiction, and an introvert.
The majority of you are not going to be able to come up with a
description that is that great,
because I am, quite possibly, the
safest woman in the world with whom someone else’s husband could have coffee…
or even lunch… but I’ll bet some of you
can get close.
A friend of mine recently made a correlation between
temptation and chocolate saying, “I don't keep bags of chocolate in the house because I know I'll be
too tempted to eat the whole thing. I like to pretend I have that kind of
self-control, but I don't. So I just don't put myself in a situation where I'll
eat a whole bag.”
The sentiment is honorable, but
friends… we’re not chocolate. I was
going to insert something in here about also not being potato chips and the “Betcha
can’t eat just one,” slogan, because I thought that was for Ruffles, but it
wasn’t, so never mind… The point is, at
this stage we’re more like carrot sticks or maybe even boxes of raisins. I’m not saying we should throw caution to the
wind. I’m not saying we should meet
behind closed doors with complete strangers.
I understand the reality in which we live where an accusation can be
just as devastating as a conviction.
Believe me. I get it.
But coffee? In a public place? With a colleague? Talking about church policy or sacraments or
even your family vacation, complete with pictures of the kids? Nothing about that screams, “Let’s have sex!” And thinking it does simply does not give
anyone the credit they deserve.
L.