{"id":30480,"date":"2023-01-26T08:59:47","date_gmt":"2023-01-26T16:59:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/?p=30480"},"modified":"2023-01-26T08:59:47","modified_gmt":"2023-01-26T16:59:47","slug":"who-ultimately-tells-me-who-i-am","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/who-ultimately-tells-me-who-i-am\/","title":{"rendered":"Who Ultimately Tells Me Who I Am?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Abigail Favale’s book, The Genesis of Gender<\/em>, is personal, philosophical, historical, and theological. Positioned as a book on theology and sociology, Favale begins by recounting her journey from a traditional childhood, to different forms of feminism, to her current position, not easily categorized into the extreme ends of the gender debate spectrum. Even the subtitle, \u201cA Christian Theory,\u201d suggests one view on the issue rather than a claim to absolute truth.<\/p>\n

From experience, Favale points to the positive emphasis of feminism as recognizing \u201cthat something is amiss, that the relationship between men and women has been too often characterized by domination.\u201d[1]<\/a> She affirms the intention to restore dignity, equal value, and mutuality between the genders. However, she takes issues with the strategy to accomplish that noble goal. \u201cHowever, blind to the dimension of grace, the solutions offered by (feminism\u2019s) theories are themselves caught in the fallen forces of conflict, in the continual grasping for power over others.\u201d[2]<\/a> The proper goal requires the right strategy rather than working against it. In this sense, Favale sounds like John McWhorter in Woke Racism<\/em>. While McWhorter recognizes the evils of racism, he believes a woke approach dehumanizes all people rather than lead society forward. Likewise, Favale argues that feminism does not restore the egalitarian relationship created by God but substitutes one form of domination for another.<\/p>\n

After relating her journey, Favale next lays out a clear and compelling Christian vision of gender based on the creation account that she calls a \u201ctrue myth.\u201d[3]<\/a> This Catholic convert leans into the teaching of Pope John Paul II to present a Christian view that does not easily fit into traditional descriptions of men and women. She argues for the creation of male and female but resists easy assumptions of the meaning of man and woman. Her view is undoubtedly not complementarian and more nuanced than simple definitions of egalitarianism. Instead, she writes about reciprocity that brings meaning to statements of equal worth and value between the genders.<\/p>\n

Favale argues for two genders primarily defined by biology. Arguing against trans anthropology, she states, \u201cthe body I am is always already revealing my personhood.\u201d[4]<\/a> She views trans identities as a longing for wholeness, revealing a need to unite body and soul.[5]<\/a> Further, she argues that differentiating between gender and the body reduces men and women to stereotypes that result in categories without meaning. \u201cIf girlness and boyness no longer reside in the body, there is no other ground for these concepts except <\/em>stereotypes.\u201d[6]<\/a> She cites a Johns Hopkins definition of \u201cbigender\u201d as \u201cexhibiting cultural characteristics of male and female roles.\u201d[7]<\/a> If culture determines gender, can there be many distinctions in this cultural moment?<\/p>\n

Favale identifies Postmodernism as an essential factor and influence in the gender issue, leading away from the biblical concept. She states, \u201cPostmodernism. . .is a worldview that sees reality in terms of narratives that are created by human beings, rather than order of objective truths that can be discovered by human beings.\u201d[8]<\/a> This point reminded me of Carl Trueman\u2019s analysis of the shift in sexuality from an objective standard to one self-determined by the individual. \u201cPostmodernism\u2019s hamartia<\/em> (fatal flaw) is assuming that there are only <\/em>narratives, only <\/em>lenses of interpretation, that no narrative can be truer than another, because there is no underlying ground of meaning.\u201d[9]<\/a> What does anything mean if no external standard exists? Holding to self-determined truth alone reduces attempts to define what is true, right, or good.<\/p>\n

The Genesis of Gender<\/em> left me with diverse takeaways:<\/p>\n