Gender Presuppositions

As part of a Continuing Ministerial Development day on gender issues in leadership, led by the excellent Kate Coleman (KC), I found myself reflecting on my gender presuppositions. Many of these are ingrained, or operate '...under the level of our faith' (KC).

I grew up in a household where Mum looked after the home and children and Dad went out to work. This meant that cooking, washing and shopping became female jobs in my head. A lady came each week to help with cleaning. Gardening, DIY and car washing/maintenance were male jobs, again, in my head.

I had a younger sister.

I was sent to all-boys schools, primary and secondary. I think pre-school may have been mixed but I cannot recall. My first five years at school I was taught by women. From then on I was only taught by men.

There was little physical contact at home. My Dad was of the school that men shook hands. That is all. Sons did not hug fathers after a certain age, and vice versa. I think my Mum would have preferred a more touchy feely approach. As I was born ten years after the end of World War 2 it is inevitable that those relatively recent experiences coloured my parents' behaviour. But, by and large, we didn't talk about the war, apart from some hilarious moments in aircraft missions, probably my Dad's way of not talking about dead friends.

My inherited views were therefore very middle-England. But the curate and church youth group leader under whose influence I fell, despite still making errors of exclusive language, was utterly in favour of women's ministry

At theological college in1981 the college worship book had an apology/explanation that male pronouns were being used generically. This was obviously designed to placate somebody but in my three year generation it became obvious that, for many of the female students, this wasn't enough.

In Nottingham 1984-1988 I was profoundly touched by a group of women doing 'Women's Studies' at the University. One of these, on hearing me tell my sons to wait for the green man before crossing, corrected my language to 'person'. I have done the same ever since. Correcting our language, however annoying, is an acknowledgement that there is a deeper correction, of the heart and mind, that needs to take place.

In Chester-le-Street in the late eighties I worked with two ordained women deacons who were both way smarter than me. It was a bit of a shock. Most of you know I am always expecting to be the smartest person in the room. They taught me loads.

The worst boss I ever had was a nice woman. The best was a devious and highly manipulative man who just happened to know the secret of getting the best out of me.

Liz and I both still say 'Come on guys' when talking to mixed groups. Probably her more than me these days. I'm trying to quit.

I think that the duty of those of us who feel we are getting there is not just to correct ourselves when we speak or act exclusively, but to police it. We need to point it out when observed or heard. It won't make us good company or fun but the job needs doing.

But as far as promoting the ministry and leadership of women is concerned - I am fully signed up.

Thought for the Day

As delivered at BBC Radio Bristol this morning. I'm back on Wednesday as they have had a late pull-out.

 

Don't judge by appearances. I remember being taught that at an early age. Yet we do. All the time.

 

Walking alone down a quiet street I am more likely to be made nervous by some people walking towards me than others. It's a defence mechanism. It may not be 100% accurate but to reach for another old teaching, 'Better safe than sorry'.

 

I have friends in retail. They have learned things about the appearance and movement patterns of those who should be watched. Shop-lifters can be spotted. Judged by appearance.

 

Last Friday's morning shows included discussion about gender - is it sexist for a man to offer to give up his seat to a heavily pregnant woman?

 

There was also the story in London about rented housing agencies deliberately stating a preference for a white tenant over black. Shocking, in this day and age.

 

At its heart discrimination is about choice. Who we make friends with. Who we work with. It only becomes bad if we deny opportunity to others on the basis of something random and of no consequence - such as age, gender, skin colour or nationality.

 

St Paul spoke of the equality of opportunity for people to hear the Christian message. He said, 'In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female for we are all one in Christ Jesus.'

 

I should put my hand on my heart and say yes, I do sometimes catch myself being accidentally sexist, ageist, racist. That I am aware of it in a way my parents' generation were not says a lot for the progress we have made. But clearly there is still work to be done.

Thought for the Day

As delivered at BBC Radio Bristol this morning:

This guy is sitting by a well in the heat of the day. A woman approaches. She's from the wrong side of the tracks. Had some dodgy relationships. As she lowers her bucket the guy says 'Get me a drink love.'

 

Themes of sexism and hot weather in one beautiful package.

 

What do we think of him? The guy. Hold that thought.

 

On the occasion of Queen Victoria's diamond jubilee piped water arrived in Nailsea for the first time. There's a commemorative stone.

 

Recently a group of people from the community have been doing something to mark Queen Elizabeth's jubilee. The Nailsea Uganda Water Project is imaginative and town-wide. Community groups, council, businesses, schools and churches partner. We hope to get safe water to one or more Ugandan villages to 'pay it forward'.

 

We take water for granted and, even in droughts, have more than many people around the world dream of. A few of us tried carrying a 20 litre container from Backwell Lake to Nailsea last year. It's a mile. We were exhausted. Ugandan women can carry two, five miles. Daily.

 

The apparently sexist guy I started with was Jesus. The woman a Samaritan. Jews didn't mix with Samaritans in those days. Their feud went back centuries. And men didn't talk to married women in public.

 

So although Jesus' behaviour sounds horrid in the UK 2013, it was ground-breaking then.

 

He went on to talk about himself as life-giving water. If you have a cool drink today maybe think about those who don't get one so easily. And ponder if your spirit needs hydrating too. That would be cool.

Quote Book Index 181-190

Amazing discovery today. There were no numbers 188 and 189. Jumped from 187 to 190 and even left space for two more to be written in but never did. How uninteresting is that readers?

181. '...they're so neanderthal ... the whole management, that after a while you only notice the grosser examples of prejudice.' (David Lodge; Nice Work)

By the way I have written two new ones in the gaps. People such as me couldn't not.

Peripheral Vision

Shavings has discussed before how the evolutionary deck has dealt men better long-sight (spotting distant targets) and women superior near-sight (embracing family, keeping the children close). That is why the woman next to you smacks your knee when you pick your nose. You don't understand how she can possibly see, but she can. She can.

This ability means that a woman is probably better at seeing two things at the same time whilst men concentrate on one. Multi-tasking anyone?

On the football field an assistant referee is required to observe if anyone is in an offside position at the moment the ball is kicked to them. This involves focusing on two separate fields of activity at the same time.

Anyone like to take a wild guess as to which gender should, in theory, be better at this?

I didn't write this only to be able to use the labels 'football,' 'evolution' and 'sexism' on the same post but it does make me happy.

Sexist Guff

How female are you? Answer yes or no unless otherwise indicated.

1. Can you quickly name an issue you can deal with personally and privately without involving anyone else in discussion? (yes = 1 point; no = 0)

2. What is the time to the nearest ten minutes (you may not look at a watch or clock until after you have guessed)? (successfully guessed = 1 point; failed = 0; looked at watch before finishing reading instructions = 1)

3. Point east. (successfully identified = 1 point; failed, or don't know how to check = 0)

4. Can you say what you want for supper immediately? (yes = 1 point; no = 0)

5. Do you take a box of tissues to the cinema ? (yes = 0 points; no = 1)

6. Do you know what your correct tyre pressures are? (yes = 1 point; no = 0)

7. Are you finding this funny so far? (yes = 1 point; no = 0)

8. Are your CDs/records/tapes in some sort of order? (yes = 1 point; no = 0; tasteful order based on colour of sleeve = 0)

9. Without looking, do you know what sort of shoes the nearest woman is wearing? (yes = 0 points; no = 1 point; sexy, strappy high-heels over a shapely ankle = 1)

10. In what circumstances might you shout ‘offside?’ (never = no points; any other circumstances = 1 point)


Score 0 Yes, you are definitely a woman
Score 1-3 You may be a woman or simply very in touch with your feminine side
Score 4-6 You are probably a man but you have let things slip a bit recently
Score 7-9 Beer?
Score 10 Offside surely

Lack of heterosexuality may bias the results