Over six centuries ago, a group of discontent housewives began a movement that infuriated social standards and households everywhere. Amidst bed making and laundry folding, they could not tune down the voice that said “Is this all there is to it?” They dared to suggest that women had the ability to do more, contribute more to society in capacities other than as baby-making machines and kitchen slaves. Fast-forward to the twenty-first century and this movement has spiraled into a social and political revolution aptly known as “feminism.”

To most, feminism is synonymous with angry women who condemn deodorant, shaving sticks and men of all types. Feminism has become an umbrella term representing all of society’s precious vices and dislikes: loud women, homosexuality, transgender persons and the “men are scum” anthem. In my experience however, there is one major reason why people do not agree with feminism: their warped interpretation of bible scriptures. In the course of translating the Bible from Hebrew to other languages, the original meanings of most passages have been lost. This leaves the Bible open to personal interpretations and I believe some people purposely decide to understand passages in the way that most suits their anti-feminist agenda. 

One of such misused scriptures is the creation story. The narration of the making of man and woman is one which has brought about a lot of controversy and also one that I believe has been mistranslated. In Genesis 2 verses 22-23, the Bible says “and the rib taken from man he made into a woman and brought her to man. Then the man said ‘This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called woman because she was taken out of man.’” Modern day misogynists and misinformed religious persons have taken this to mean that since man was created first, woman’s “place” in life is beneath the man. The role of the woman has been belittled and become one of perpetual subservience simply because of the order of creation. If this were true, why would the Bible boast of influential women such as Dorcas, Deborah the judge, Mary the mother of Jesus and Queen Esther? I take this part of the Bible as one which alludes to the fact that the woman was created in this way to make her inseparable from man, a constant companion rather than a second-class citizen.

Another common reference is cited in Ephesians 5 verses 22-33. The apostle Paul prescribes a sort of manual married couples are “mandated” to follow. In this passage he says “Wives be subject to your husbands.” Eagerly, misogynistic men take this line as justification for the disrespect they show to their wives. They fail to acknowledge another crucial part of the same passage: “Husbands should love their wives as their own bodies.” One cannot be taken without the other. I do not believe that any husband would want to cause harm to himself; that any husband would not want equal pay, success, vast opportunities and ultimately; freedom. They are simply asked to treat their wives the same way they wish to be treated. We must also remember that he says all this with the assumption that the husband is the sole breadwinner and head of the family. In today’s world this is hardly the case. Women have overcome the physical and psychological barriers that once hindered their progress. They have become business tycoons, breadwinners, innovators and the existence of stay-at-home fathers is becoming more common-place. Another thing worthy of note is: this passage is simply Paul’s opinion. Not a law set in stone.

Finally, in Proverbs 31 verses 10-31, a description of the ideal woman is given. She is one who “rises while it is yet night”, “works with willing hands” and “is more precious than jewels.” People have taken the fact that the woman is being praised for domestic tasks as backing for their stance that as Nigeria’s president put it, women “belong in the kitchen and in the other room.” However, we overlook the fact that in Biblical times, this was the most that ordinary women could aspire to. This woman is a hard-working, supportive companion for her husband and a responsible mother. She is not being forced or relegated to these duties but does them out of love.

I would like to see a change in the way women are perceived. This expands to all women in every capacity: sex icons and video vixens, women in the military, homemakers, transgender women and the like. We who are privileged to have the gift of religion and a spiritual guide (the Bible) should stop misusing this privilege to put down women. We need to recognize the micro-aggressions and discrimination targeted towards them under the cloak of the Church. Christian women should be celebrated and have the important role they play recognized. We should acknowledge that women can be sexual beings, professional beings, leaders, heads and not always “necks” as feminist lite would have it.

Although there may be several other passages I am yet to set my eyes on, my overall message remains the same: the Bible is a tool to spread love and stimulate the Christian’s religious journey, not one to promote backwardness of the female gender.