Gender and Grace: Love, Work and Parenting in a Changing World, by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen (InterVarsity, 278 pp.; $9.95, paper). Reviewed by Michael W. Mangis, assistant professor of clinical psychology at Wheaton College Graduate School in Wheaton, Illinois.
In her latest book, Gender and Grace, social psychologist Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen once again proves she is a leading figure in the integration of faith and the social sciences. Concerned that many Christians approach gender roles with little knowledge of the issues, she has prepared a comprehensive introduction. Van Leeuwen argues cogently that Christians should be interested in the knowledge to be gained from natural revelation and suggests ways it can help us build on a scriptural framework.
Many discussions about gender roles begin, and immediately bog down, in battles over interpretation of Pauline passages, leaving other questions unanswered. Saving “headship” until the final chapter, Van Leeuwen begins at the beginning, with the opening chapters of Genesis. She asks, Which gender differences were intended by God? And from there she goes on to explore other questions: How do gender differences come about? Which are genetically inevitable and which are more cultural? What are the costs, to men and women, of the current gender distinctions?
Van Leeuwen grounds her arguments in Scripture. She proposes that Adam and Eve sinned differently, each overstepping the bounds of part of God’s cultural mandate, resulting in a similarly differentiated curse. Our interpretation of gender roles, Van Leeuwen suggests, must begin with an understanding that much of what we consider the “natural” order of things is not what God originally intended. The fallen state of gender roles is part of what Christ came to reverse.
The Problem With Averages
While describing herself as a “Christian feminist” (defined as someone who “sees women and men as equally saved, equally Spirit-filled and equally sent”), she does recognize gender differences. In fact, she suggests that gender complementarity is just as appropriate to the creation design as gender equality.
In her view of the research, the author consistently reveals the human tendency to want to see traits and abilities as lying at one of two poles, male or female. In reality, the stereotypical differences are nothing more than tendencies and averages. When verbal ability is measured, for example, girls typically obtain higher scores than boys. However, when these results are examined, one finds substantial overlap of scores. Similar findings are repeated for most stereotyped gender characteristics. While averages might differ for men and women for a particular trait, many men will score substantially in the “female” range and vice versa.
Even if a clear male/female difference were demonstrated for a trait, Van Leeuwen asks, how would we know whether it was an inherent difference based on sex or a distinction based on the dissimilar effects of environment? At this point she turns to the research related to the nature-versus-nurture question. Based on her intriguing review of the scientific literature, she argues that many of our assumptions about clear differences between men and women are illusions. In reality, males and females, from the womb, are biologically more similar than different. Research demonstrates that the small biological variance that does exist is greatly magnified by environment, parenting, and other factors.
Citing the classic “Baby X” studies, Van Leeuwen illustrates the compounding effects of environment on gender formation. In such studies, small infants are dressed neutrally. They are then given to adults who are told either that the child is a girl or a boy. When the child is labeled as a girl, even if the child is actually a boy, she/he is described as more friendly, sociable, feminine, physically “fragile,” and easily uspet. The opposite masculine stereotypes are applied to boy-labeled babies, again regardless of the child’s actual sex.
In studies of individuals with an extra male or female sex chromosome, a form of genetic anomaly, individuals with an extra X-chromosome do not act more masculine nor do those with an extra Y-chromosome act more feminine. Van Leeuwen demonstrates that even research on normal male/female genetic differences does not support the theory that gender-specific traits can be linked to chromosomal differences between men and women. Such patterns of behavior are simply too complex to be explained so simply.
Similarly, research on the effects of hormonal differences on gender does not support the clear polarity that we expect between masculinity and femininity. While some differences—particularly in perception, thinking, and personality—seem to stem from the disparate effects of male and female hormones on development, Van Leeuwen (and others) assert, with evidence, that these are usually found to be “very small biological differences that are highly magnified by our personal and social histories and by the immediate demands of situations in which we find ourselves.” Even studies of differences in the way men and women use the brain’s hemispheres find small distinctions that are more complex than the simple stereotypes.
Cultural differences in gender roles suggest that there are few universal definitions of what it means to be male or female. One theme does consistently emerge, however: in every culture, what men do is seen as more important than what women do. This is ironic, Van Leeuwen comments, since the New Testament describes becoming a Christian in essentially childlike and feminine terms.
Natural But Fallen
If much of what we believe to be masculinity and femininity is not “built in,” where does it come from? Van Leeuwen argues convincingly that throughout history we have constructed a system that shapes gender roles and perpetuates the effects of the Fall. Differences that God did not intend or, perhaps, distortions of the differences that he did intend, became established, trained, and defined as normal. Ironically, many Christians then refer to these patterns as proof that these roles are what God intended. “Of course men were meant to be the leaders. Just look around and see how much better they are at it.”
The author hopes to deflate a common myth among Christians that the Bible proclaims the family a sacred refuge amidst the storm of an evil world. In this view of the family, where father wins the bread and mother minds the nest, our children see father as largely absent and mother as primarily unvalued by both society and the church. This notion, she concludes, is historically very recent and becomes idolatrous when we value the nuclear family over the family of God. A second myth in the church, according to Van Leeuwen, is the erroneous belief that prior to the sixties and the feminist movement, men and women were content with their stereotypical roles. To further demonstrate that the church does not have the corner on the definition of the healthy family, she points out that, next to alcoholic families, the highest incidence of incest and physical abuse is in highly religious homes.
Challenging us to a new understanding, Van Leeuwen poignantly illustrates the costs of the current societal definitions of gender, to both men and women. The most healthy children, she suggests, are those whose fathers are actively involved in parenting. Boys, especially, develop gender insecurity when they are expected to develop a confident masculinity yet have little contact with the father they are supposed to emulate. She argues that parenting should become the task of both marriage partners. The current prejudice, in society and in the church, against men who put family before career makes this more difficult.
Headship And Servanthood
Ending where many Christians begin, Van Leeuwen suggests that doctrinal positions on headship should never be used as a test of one’s Christianity. While a family centered on the traditional definition of headship can be appropriate, it is not synonymous with the healthy family. There is, unfortunately, much more concern over who can be head of the family and the church than over how we should live out the servanthood to which Christ calls us. Though her hermeneutical position on headship can be inferred, Van Leeuwen does not prescribe a single Christian response to this question.
A limitation of the book follows from its greatest strength. Van Leeuwen’s admirable desire to provide a comprehensive overview of gender roles often requires a cursory discussion of the research and issues. While most of her general assertions seem reasonable, her confident conclusions from studies on “nature versus nurture” may lead the reader to assume that the research is unequivocal. As is often the case, other research exists in support of quite different conclusions.
Van Leeuwen’s presentation of the issues involved in understanding gender is thoughtful and challenging. Many who have done little or no investigation into the issues involved shout loudly and confidently that the Bible has told us everything we need to know about gender roles. Few have thoroughly studied the questions and evidence from several directions, as Van Leeuwen has done. Gender and Grace adds much to the discussion. Those unfamiliar with the debate in which the church is embroiled will find this book an excellent starting point. Those already involved will be challenged by a fresh presentation.
