In Response To Joi Samuels' "Independence Day... What Do You Think?"

In Response To Joi Samuels' "Independence Day... What Do You Think?"
M.D. Wright
12.18.08

I am going to be short with this.

1. I don't know how negative of a connotation as it has with everyone. But when I hear it, my head rolls.

2. There is no such thing as an independent PERSON. PERIOD.

That said, I'll address both those points.

Whenever I have heard women say this, I hear a tinge of resentment; as if it is a jab at the paternal world that we live in. More disturbing are the numbers of supposedly-Christian women who subscribe to this -- knowing that God placed specific importance of the roles of men and women in this world. For those who choose not to accept Christ as their Savior and later Lord -- nor God's Word/Principles, then OK; you believe what you want. However, this is is a spiritual law and there is no way around it, regardless of what you choose to believe or not believe.

We are seeing signs of the chaos that ensues when there is a concerted effort to intentionally insert women as the heads of organizations and other large institutions. Follow me. I am not a chauvinist. God placed man as covering for women. In EVERY arena of life. This can not be avoided. Or else you have a situation similar to what took place when King Ahab's notorious wife Jezebel sought to effectively usurp Ahab's control and do her own thing. I'm not going to preach. If you want the facts on that, go read the Bible.

2. No one is independent. No man. No woman. No person is an island. God did not create people to function on their own so that they could become glory-hogs. One thing that disturbs me (because I am fully secure and supremely confident -- therefore that nonsense about being "intimidated" does not apply to me) is the level of arrogance present in most of the women who utter this foolish phrase. Think about it. Everything is "I have such and such degree"... "I make X-amount of money"... "I am so and so Doctor this, Attorney that" (nothing wrong with titles, but when you use them to define you... and think that for some reason someone should genuflect before you...) and all the other diatribe with them.

Look. I am all for equality. I WANT an educated woman to marry. I can talk intelligibly about almost everything, so I don't want a dummy or someone who is caught up in her hair, nails and how much money I can spend on her. She needs to be able to carry her own weight for sure. But there is a difference between being able to do that and this "independent" foolishness.

Strength and determination aren't defined by how much money you have, how LATE you (intentionally, I might add) put off marriage for the sake of your career and education, instead of juggling both -- and not neglecting your God-given and NOBLE role as chief nurturer (WHEN did this become "insulting" to women, by the way???) solely to prove some sort of needless point. We have been created equal, but to serve distinct and DIFFERENT functions. Or else, why would God have needed to create woman? A homemaker, part-time business owner/homemaker possesses the same strength and determination that it takes to swim amongst the corporate sharks (by whatever motive).

Sadly, too many women equate those qualities with bullheadedness, radical feminism (the converse to male chauvinism -- reforms are still necessary, but radical feminism set women's causes BACK rather than further them).

Only a weakling of a man wants a woman he can dominate or feel needed by 24/7. Only a wuss of a man wants a doormat and a Yes-Woman. But NO self-respecting man wants a bullheaded woman who constantly has a chip on her shoulder about proving her equal weight in glory with men when God already says you are equal. Your job, education, income, etc. attained apart from the "support" of a man does not make you any more equal (or better, as some radicals think) than a man. We are not in competition. We're working together to achieve the same thing.

I saw an interview with a group of women who are in their late 30s and early 40s who have never been married and now all of a sudden want to marry. They're desperate. They realize their window for having children (without serious health risks) has narrowed much like the Phoenix Suns' chances of winning an NBA Championship (sorry, I always have to fit sports in somewhere. Indulge me.) Now they realize they can't just step out and get a man like they could when they were 25. And aside from a few sleazebag men, no one cares about these women's statuses and income, education, etc. But think about it. How many men did these women consciously pass up in their 20s? Being "independent" has its drawbacks. I heard this woman at my church stand up during a forum a few years ago -- bragging about how she has this and that and all this nonsense. She was about 33 or so at the time and she's probably still not married. I don't care who the man is. If he's self-respecting -- he could be a broke college student, a middling employee at a customer service office or a high-ranking man -- he does NOT want to hear all of that if he's looking at you romantically and for marriage. The Proverbs 31 woman is "intimidating" to some women, because it seems like it is "just asking too much" to be all those different things. Indeed, those are qualities that a woman should seek to attain. Just as men (those who are faithful to their families that is -- many aren't. We know that. No need to even bring that up at this point. We hear that ALOT more than we hear men talk about women and this hogwash about "independence") are called to do the same. The Proverbs 31 woman was not independent. Nor did she run around gloating about her exploits. She did her thing and her husband (King Lemuel was to look for a woman possessing those qualities -- it was not describing a real life woman who had done it) apperciates it. They work in tandem. Not in competition or INDEPENDENT of the other.

Regards,
mdw