What A Matriarchy Looks Like

Who is the head of the family?
Who is the head of the family?

Feminism is about female superiority over men and women are even heralded as saviors of mankind. Despite its claims to humble equality, the natural result of its ideology is matriarchy, a society governed by feminine sensibilities. The evangelical church does not see the demeaning of masculinity and the deliberate promotion of female authority. In order to maintain some semblance of integrity with “biblical” ideas, it has accepted equality without calling it equality, what is called complimentarian; men and women are equal but have different roles.

Now I imagine that a distilled version of patriarchy would look like a military unit. It is obvious that some men are superior to others the superior men are given rank and responsibility above others. In family and church it not so clear or obvious because of the presence of women. While the feminine presence is the completion of man’s creation, in his current fallen state, something from God is gained and something from the devil smuggled in. A man must not only deal with his own fallen nature and the fallen nature in other men, but also the fallen nature in women. As Don Corleone said in The Godfather, “I spent my whole life trying not to be careless. Women and children can afford to be careless, but not men.”

Since women are not men and function along feminine lines, when they are in charge, things should not be expected to look the same as if men were in charge. Just what a matriarchy might look like is ambiguous and difficult to imagine and that is from the natural way that the emotional storms that women are capable of cloud and confuse a man’s ability to develop order.

However, there is an idea that I think would be a perfect place to start. In fact, once this paradigm is in place, a matriarchy becomes easy to imagine and see.

Sunshine Mary posted an article about a concept called “backleading.” She writes,

… Badger explains is a ballroom dancing term referring to a woman who is “resisting the lead’s kinesthetic instructions that are part and parcel of partner dancing.”

She then goes on to explain how this analogy applies to marriage:

A wife in this situation wants it to seem like she is submitting to her husband’s leadership but really she is trying to backlead him into making decisions that she feels like submitting to and not making decisions that she doesn’t feel like submitting to. [Emphasis mine]

This is how I imagine a complimentarian marriage actually functions in reality despite what leaders claim it is supposed to be. On the outside, men attend leadership meetings, pastors preach on male headship from the pulpit, and books are written about men finding their way back to masculinity.

But it is behind the scenes where the matriarchy is most likely to grow and thrive. It is in the home, especially the bedroom, that matriarchy finds it fertile ground. Christian men leave their meetings and their church services and go home to their wives. Since they are bound by God, church, and vow to never leave their wives even in the worst situations, they must bear burden of whatever their wives throw their way (called “fitness testing” by some).

What happens behind closed doors is usually kept private, but their is some truth that Christian men deal with varying degrees of this:

In this clip from Steel Magnolias, at 2:00, Drum declares what his true motivation is:

If I don’t I’ll have to deal with my wife and I make it a point to never deal with my wife.

Before a Christian man makes a decision, he must first consider his wife’s feelings on the matter. Those feelings can easily become the decided factor. To the outside world, he is a strong leader, working to provide for his family in service to Christ, when in reality he is merely working to satisfy his wife’s endless emotional needs. In public, it appears to be biblical male-authority headship, but in private is female-feeling headship.

Consider statements like the following:

  • “If mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.”
  • “We all know who wears the pants in the family.”
  • “Behind every good man is a good woman.”

What these statements say is that even though a man may publicly carry himself with the respect due a man who carries the burdens of responsibility, it is his wife that bears the final authority in their home. And that authority carries into public.

For those American churches that still promote male authority in the home and the pulpit, if they are going to quote things like,

 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God (1 Corinthians 11:3 KJV),

then they need to recognize that what it preaches and what its congregation practices may not be the same. It needs to recognize the problem is systemic. From old mainline denominations to small fundamentalist churches, where there is women, there is the reality of matriarchy.

It is little wonder that the men in the apostle Paul’s day declared, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”


There Is No Matriarchy

Ladies, we are in charge!
Ladies, we are in charge!

I have been pondering why American Evangelical Christianity cannot recognize the matriarchy that is emerging all around them. Secular sources not only recognize it, but celebrate it. The idea of a society run and governed by feminine sensibilities is becoming quite popular.

The Evangelical Church holds to a complimentarian relationship between men and women, but that is merely accepting feminist equality while never using the terms “feminist” and “equality.” While claiming their doctrines are derived from scripture, they often overlook the obvious presence of male dominance their own religion is founded on.

Christianity is a historic religion and both its holy text and the God it declares are masculine. The Bible is a male-oriented text, written by men to men, guided by a divine Father through the authority granted to a divine Son. There is no way to soften this or smooth it over without ignoring the majority of what is presented.

The only reason I can conjure as to why the church refuses to see the matriarchy in its own pews and pulpits is that it expects a matriarchy to look and function like a patriarchy. They look for women in positions of power and authority to act like men in positions of power and authority, which feminism claims is bad.

If matriarchy is like what patriarchy is said to be, women would be expected to act violently against their husbands and rape their husbands when they wanted sex. That is supposedly what equality freed women from. Yet, because women are not violently beating their husbands or raping them in the bed (as patriarchal men were said to have beat and raped their wives), then it must be equality and not matriarchy.

An egalitarian mindset would explain this in secular and liberal circles, as men and women are both equal and essentially the same. But on the side of the aisle that claims that men and women are fundamentally different, it should be obvious that a matriarchy would not look like a patriarchy.

However, this issue will be out and in the open should America elect its first female president. While it may be a few elections away, the desire for such a feminist achievement is always there. With a female president, will her husband be equal to her or subservient to her authority, especially since other men in her cabinet will definitely be subordinate?

But what of women across the country? Will they view a female president’s authority over men as a sign of the new order of things? At such a point, it will be obvious to the evangelical church that women are running home, church, and country, but will church leaders be bold enough to actually say “Hey! Women are running home, church, and country!”

Ceasar Will Not Save America

The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. – John 19:15

When I was an undergrad, I remember when former President Bill Clinton visited my college to campaign for his wife, Hillary, in 2007. What struck me was the intense fervor that the audience had. Nothing Mr. Clinton could say would have been wrong. I also noticed a ripple of fear when it came to the opposite party. It was simply a given that if a Republican won the office, the country would be doomed. The Democrat Party was considered pure and the Republicans corrupt and the empowerment of the Right would bring in a world of darkness. There would be weeping and gnashing of teeth by minorities, women, and gays.

Fast forward to 2012. Barack Obama is running for the Democratic Party. Conservatives everywhere are full of fervor for the Republican Party because it is the pure and noble opposition to the corrupt and evil Democrat Party. A small portion of Christians warn that Obama may be the infamous antichrist set to rule the world at the end of the age. And there is fear, fear that the progressive vision held by the Democrats will usher in a world of darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth by whites, Christians, the small business owner, and the wealthy.

All of it is political sound and fury and nothing is truly signified. The population is fighting culturally over having its own Caesar in power. For the right, it is the Caesar of Ronald Reagan and economic prosperity. For the left, it is the Caesar of Barack Obama and economic equality.

Hear the Christian say he has no king but Caesar.

Hear the pagan say he has no king but Caesar.

Now hear the words of the One who is and will always be the only king over planet earth.

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. – Matthew 6:24

The church in America has lost sight of its true king and has sided with the Caesars of the political world. Television and radio herald the greatness of these Caesars while pulpits with lights, cameras, and production become places where modern Pharisees and false prophets convolute the wisdom put forth by Christ and His kingdom.

If a Christian is to stop cheering for Caesar and return to the throne of Christ, he must first recognize that America has deeper problems than whether or not the economy is capitalist or socialist. He must face feminism. The notion of equality is the trunk of the tree of evil and money is the root.

From feminism comes divorce called independence, giving women the freedom to earn their own money.

From feminism comes adultery called sex-positive equality, giving women the freedom to sleep with men that will be generous with their money. This includes being paid as a porn star.

From feminism comes abortion called choice, giving women the freedom to not spend their money on children.

For the church, divorce, adultery, and abortion should be unacceptable, but as a long as it accepts equality between men and women, female sympathies will be the deciding factor instead of what Christ has decreed. Conservative churches criticize these things, but do they out of obedience to the enthroned Jesus or because the women of the church have decreed these things to be hurtful to their feelings and happiness while being quietly reserved as a necessary evil because men are evil? Right now, the answer is not all that clear.

America may soon elect its first female president. At that point, open calls for a matriarchal (female-oriented / female-dominated) society will begin, with equality becoming a political white wash to cover the desired inequality. The church will have to make a choice to either continue to seek a solution in Madam Caesar in Washington or return to a biblically modeled standard of Father and Sons, which runs completely counter to the emerging political and social culture that is rising to dominate America.