Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Women in Leadership-- Is this for real?

I know, I know there's been lots of hot debate on the topic of women in leadership. From the political arena where Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin were throwing their hat in the ring of the 2008 elections to our very local Seattle context where a certain hip, cool, conservative, preacher type touts that a real woman's place is behind a stove while only wearing an apron. Not everyone is okay with that female depiction or even agrees with the biblical interpretation that is used to support such ideas and after much back and forth and back and forth we find a few who will actually find a place for a woman in their leadership structure-- whew!

Here's the problem with this approach-- although, a place might be created, room to squeeze in a few females might be made and even while singing the glories of egalitarianism the problem still lies in the fact that it's only at the comfort and ease of a dominate structure set in place and that's been turning in motion for let's just say forever (in saving ourselves the trouble of calculating an actual timeline).

Now you'd be correct in sensing that my tone sounds sarcastic, frustrated and angry. And let me tell you why, because it comes from a place of pain-- where myself and many of my female colleagues have been told that we should be okay with that-- even better, we should be thankful that we have this space-- it's something, after all. And the pain comes from the place where each day we have one of two choices to make: 1) we can choose to be silenced and take one on for the team (this works well in church circles because of how it's tied into the tenants of the Christian faith) or 2) we can choose to try, as impossible as it may, to put on the male power suit and masquerade as 'equal' leaders-- as long as we never challenge the male structure-- instead learn to play within it which in the end means we have to leave behind the essence of who we are at home or in our brief cases every single day.

This essentially is a mixed message of-- we accept you as long as you don't really bring who you are to the table because we don't have room, time or interest in restructuring how we've always done things. This mixed message is everywhere-- it is in the business arena, political arena, church arena, educational arena-- everywhere.

A 'real' equal approach to a dual gender leadership structure is one of collaboration. It means looking at existing structures and collaboratively working together to reflect the voice and styles of both males and females. It means as much as females have to be shaped and changed and influenced each day by our male counterparts-- that males, too, are shaped and changed by our existence... The commitment to collaboration has to come from a place of desire in seeing sisters with freedom being able to use their God-given voices, talents and experiences towards the work of our missions. It has to come from a place of knowing that our missions, our work will go that much further with the ingenuity of the female perspective and we have to steer away from the ancient approach and ideas that that can only be done in a system where women are held as supporting cast members. The 'supporting cast member' category is killing us. It is literally zapping us of the energy to use our gifts and instead requires us to prove ourselves and to choose each day 1) will we be silent (which essentially means we don't exist) or 2) will we speak and find ourselves with an insurmountable wall of defense.

4 comments:

laurie said...

I cannot tell you how much I love this post. In addition to agreeing with you completely, I can see you, feel you, hear you in this post more than any other I think I've read. It is so REAL! Your voice is clear; your anger is real and beautiful. You are breaking the silence, and while I know it's scary, it's freakin' beautiful and inspiring. Thank you.

Daniel F. said...

DeAnza,

Thanks for posting on this. I'll try to be concise on this topic, but it's a tough one for me to keep short. It would probably be poor form if my response to you was longer than your original post.

The idea of “taking one for the team” is particularly aggravating for me. It’s often applied to others, rarely to self, as in “YOU have to take one for the team.”

In the sports analogy, one team member leaves the game blind, everybody else keeps playing in top form, maybe even better than they were before the loss occured.

The Bible doesn’t seem to see it that way. How eager would you be for someone else to take that blinding strike if you knew the whole team, including you, would go blind as a result?

1 Cor 12:26 specifically tells us that “If one part suffers, every part suffers with it.” There is no such thing as shifting suffering onto one member to the benefit of others. The whole "team" takes one, whether we like it or not.

Trying to convince ourselves that we are not diminished by the loss of our sisters’ perceptions, talents, and gifts is like trying to convince ourselves that we are not part of the same body, that it doesn’t hurt us when we can’t see out of one eye, that it doesn’t matter that we’re on the field with an arm and a leg tied behind our collective back.

“The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field.” -- Matthew 9:27-28

If this verse is true, then why is the Church so often playing the bouncer rather than the recruiter?

We need to stop thinking of ourselves as a multi-person team that meets for matches on Sunday but otherwise is composed of independent and self-sufficient individuals at any other time. Instead we must to re-adopt the Biblical lesson that we are one body, a single athlete. And if we want to run better than a half-assed race we’re going to need all of our parts present, able to answer their callings, deploy their gifts, and perform those functions for which the Creator made them.

Ian said...

You have managed to elevate the conversation about this complex issue, DeAnza. Your ideas are fresh and challenging, and you are more than just thoughtful and knowledgable- you are also wise.

Anonymous said...

change in thought requires sacrifice. What are you willing to give up?