Misogyny

It's built on two Greek terms. The first part, "miso", comes from the Greek term for "hate"; the second, "gyny", is from the Greek for "woman". Easy. Misogyny is the hatred of women. As opposed to misanthropy -- the hatred of humans -- or misandry -- the hatred of males. Well, you get the idea. Hating women is a bad thing.

But what does that look like? We all understand that mistreating women, abusing women, hurting women is bad. However, as I've pointed out in the past, we have a general problem of determining exactly what "harm" actually is. It is my suspicion that a lot of we consider "liberation" and "freedom for women" is equally misogynistic.

Consider my starting premises. 1) God is good. 2) The Bible is God's Word. Ergo, what God says in the Bible is good.

So, we do not want to be misogynistic. Hating women ... or men or anyone ... is a bad thing. Let's not do that.

And, yet, in the name of "women's rights" and the "advancement of women" we, even Christians, will argue that wives should not submit to their husbands. Now, hang on a minute. Isn't that a clear command? Do we not plainly read, "Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord" (Eph 5:22)? Did Peter not clearly say, "Wives, be submissive to your own husbands" (1 Peter 3:1)? If this is God's command in God's Word, is it loving to encourage wives to defy God?

Paul wrote, "I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ." (1 Cor 11:3) Clear enough, isn't it? Now, we can discuss nuances. Headship is not lordship. Women are not required to submit to all men. Abuse of headship is abuse and abuse of women is abuse, and abuse is right out. Yes. But when we -- both our culture and, more importantly, fellow believers -- argue against these plain texts, is this good for women? More to the point, if it is good for women, then we will need to revisit our first point -- God is good -- because He made these commands and statements and we're saying He was wrong.

Wives have a unique position in a biblical worldview. Unless they are being told to violate God's Word, they can be quite sure that they are in God's will as long as they follow their husband's leading. Husbands don't get that option. So wives can know what the will of God is as long as they, you know, obey what God says they should do. And we come along and tell them, "Oh, no. Throw that out. Don't submit to that guy. He doesn't know enough to come in out of the rain." We offer lame ideas of "equality" and then argue that "men and women are equal", suggesting that God did not make men and women to complement each other with their own sets of propensities, strengths, and capabilities. "No, no," they'll argue, "we're all equal" meaning not "we're equal in value" but "we're equal in every way." This isn't helping women. Ignoring God's design is not helpful to women.

Men who abuse women are misogynists. No doubt. And that's a bad thing, whether they're husbands or merely associated in some sense. Whether it's physical or mental or emotional abuse. "Wives submit" is not permission to hate women. Misogyny would include objectifying them and lusting after and minimizing them. But women prove themselves misogynists when they shake their fists in the face of God and say, "No! We will not submit!" As if that's good for women. As if fracturing God's commands and protections makes for better lives for women. When Christians argue "Women should be pastors just like men" in the face of "I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet" (1 Tim 2:12-14) (a passage that lays the responsibility for sin in humans at Adam's feet, not Eve's), we are not being loving. We are defying the God who made us. When we do that to the detriment of women, it is misogyny. And hating women is wrong. Encouraging women to follow God and His commands is not misogyny, and that's good. But you knew that, right?