Complementarian Straw

This article will be much shorter than my last one on this subject, but it is no less important. Having established the absurdity of anti-Scriptural egalitarianism, I will now prove that my flamethrower burns straw on both sides of this controversy. Complementarianism has anti-Scriptural forms, too.

The reason this article will be shorter is because the complementarian straw man is rather simply expressed. It is based, almost universally, on the premise that women and their roles are inferior to men and theirs.

In a sense, it is actually more important for me to address the poor arguments on my side, for this reason: most egalitarians I speak to, if I speak to them for long enough, will eventually recite to me a personal experience of complementarianism gone rotten. Whether it was from their father, brother, pastor, or teacher, they have been on the receiving end of any number of deplorable expressions of obtuse male supremacy.

“Toxic masculinity” is a wildly inflated term in our current cultural moment. Frenzied complaints of “manspreading” and gendered language have cheapened its value as an identifier of genuine misbehavior. Nevertheless, the term retains some of its original currency. No doubt, labeling all dogs as wolves will unjustifiably sully the reputations of the labradors and retrievers, but refusing to ever cry “Wolf!” won’t resurrect all the dead sheep (or de-traumatize the young women in red hoods carrying baked goods to grandma’s house). Toxic masculinity, the real kind, does exist. It has for a long time, in the world, and in the church. Here is a great example from one of the early church fathers:

“God maintained the order of each sex by dividing the business of life into two parts, and assigned the more necessary and beneficial aspects to the man and the less important, inferior matter to the woman.”

-John Chrysostom

What’s interesting is that ol’ Johnny almost gets it right. Earlier in the same treatise (link to full text) he remarks, “God did not apportion both duties to one sex, lest the other be displaced and be considered superfluous.” This is true Biblical complementarianism. Men and women need each other precisely because they complement one another. Clearly, Chrysostom read and understood Genesis 1 & 2. Unfortunately, he seems not to have studied Proverbs 31 nearly as deeply.

“A wife of noble character who can find?

    She is worth far more than rubies.

Her husband has full confidence in her

    and lacks nothing of value.

Her children arise and call her blessed;

    her husband also, and he praises her:

Honor her for all that her hands have done,

    and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.”

Tell me, does that description of a woman’s role sound like Chrysostom’s? Does God regard the bearing and raising of children and the keeping and care of a husband and a home as “the less important, inferior matter”? The obvious answer is of course not!

Consider this analogy. The best kicker in the NFL can kick a football through the goalposts from 60 yards away. Let’s say he’s right-footed. Which of his legs is stronger? The right one. Which leg is the dominant one? The right. Which leg leads? Right again. Now, here comes the key question: which leg is more important? If you say the right leg, then let’s do a quick thought experiment in amputation. Cut off his left leg. Now how far can he kick the ball?

You see, complementarianism (when understood Biblically) is not a declaration of the superiority and importance of men and the comparative inferiority and unimportance of women. True Biblical complementarianism cherishes, celebrates, and honors men and women, their strengths and their weaknesses, their similarities and their differences.

So the next time you hear some vexed, overcompensating frat boy spouting off about how people with an X chromosome where a Y should be are flimsy, fickle, and useless, pay him no heed. He is wrong. Women are not identical to men, but we should not despair about that fact. Instead, we should thank God for it. I thank God for his wisdom in designing men and women differently, to complement and serve one another in the fulfillment of unique roles. And I thank him that authority and submission, leading and helping, are not hierarchies of value, despite the ugly things that certain kinds of men have been known to say about certain kinds of women.

As to the complementarian straw man constructed by the sexists, mysogynists, and he-man woman haters, I offer the advice of the worst kind of complementarian, an R&B singer.

Let it burn.