Radical Feminism and Christianity
By George C. Stewart

The following is a news item from the Morehead State University (KY), followed by notes I took at the meeting, and observations I expressed after the panel discussion.

Morehead State University, Sunday, October 1, 2006

Challenges facing the dissemination of feminist teaching in America will be examined at a special event at Morehead State University.

"American Anti-Intellectualism and the Future of the Feminist Classroom," an interdisciplinary program, will be presented at 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 3, in 2 Breckinridge Hall. Sponsored by the University's Interdisciplinary Women's Studies Program, it is free and open to the public.

The multimedia presentation will feature a three-person panel of experts that will address the issue of whether feminism is in a position to make its subject material relevant to students living in a culture that is increasingly conservative, isolated and influenced by a protestant Christian awareness.

The panelists include: Dr. Amy Morgenstern, associate director of the honors program at Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio; Dr. Kelli Zaytoun, director of the women's studies program and assistant professor of English at Wright; and Stacy Asher, assistant professor at the School of Art at Ohio University.

Dr. Morgenstern will frame a concrete description of the growth of megachurches and exurban communities in southwest Ohio in terms of the enlightenment theory of Immanuel Kant, and other critiques and theories. Her presentation will include a photo presentation of the megachurch culture located in the "corridor" between Dayton and Cincinnati.

Dr. Zaytoun's presentation, rooted in psychological development theory, composition studies, feminist epistemology and pedagogy, will focus on the challenge of teaching critical thinking skills as a way to resist the "counter pedagogy" of religious fundamentalism. She also will discuss how religion and spiritual issues can be engaged in the classroom.

Asher will give a multi-media presentation on visual design processes. In particular, she will present "Pink Dot Experiment: 05.19.05, Athens Ohio," and "Black Wonder: Teaching Youth about Marketing and Advertising," which are social sculptures that assisted her students in using design as a language that is socially meaningful and culturally critical.

After the event, from 6-8 p.m., Asher will re-enact her Pink Dot Experiment along University Boulevard, beginning at the Adron Doran University Center. The rain date for the experiment, co-sponsored by MSU's Department of Art, is Wednesday, Oct. 4, from 9-11 a.m.

Additional information is available by calling Dr. Sylvia Henneberg, associate professor of English and director of the Interdisciplinary Women's Studies Program, at (606) 783-5288. Posted: 9-27-06

Morgenstern projected pictures of the Solid Rock Church near Monroe, Ohio. Commenting on the large statue of Jesus, she wondered how long a Jewish Star of David would be allowed to stand across the road. This implied that Christians are accepted but Jews are not.

She said she went to this mega-church to learn about the church and its programs. However, by picking only this congregation—and the remarks she made about it—shows she had another agenda. In her own words she admitted she is a "radical feminist."

She said she went to a Sunday worship and saw "jumping up and down, swinging, smiling, etc." She called it "theater" and the merging of conservatism and spirituality. (Another political reference.) She called this church "user friendly" while she is an "intellectual, and critical-thinking Jew." She said large churches are serving the communities with various services, such as child care. On the other hand she made light of what they were doing. She also said this service allowed them to become "authoritative." She claims the church is performing "mass manipulation." She said, "My concern is people's consciousness is being manipulated," unlike the teachings of philosopher Immanuel Kant.

She said Adolph Eichmann was a good person who had been caught up in the Nazi authoritarian regime and ended up slaughtering millions of Jews. Therefore, Christians who submit to an external authority are subject to the same behavior.

She considers Christians as "abusive-compulsive" for being concerned about the devil. (Obviously she doesn't believe there is a devil.) She thinks that Christians wanting to convert others is "a very individualistic practice of religion."

She explained that she is Jewish and has a "concern about growing conservatism" and the "emancipation" of women. She said she was concerned that the Christian Churches were used as "outposts for the last presidential election." She quotes the NY Times for support. (This statement reveals the political agenda of her presentation.)

As a teacher she is concerned that her students believe that their faith in God prevents them from doing critical thinking. (Here we have motive for her teaching "critical thinking"--elimination of the students' faith in Christianity.

This speaker began by saying there are two forces which create confusion in women's studies: Religion and Ideas of Absolute Truth.

"Feminism rejects religion" she stated flatly.

Concerning religion, she believes "religious fundamentalism promotes a mono-thinking, coming from external sources." She thinks there is too much emphasis on truth coming from an external source rather than from internally. Thus "evil results from a lack of critical thinking." She believes that "religious fundamentalism does not support communities or allow them to go forward."

As a teacher she thinks there is a need to discuss religion in the classroom, yet she remains a secular person who wants to criticize Christianity. (One might wonder why she wants to discuss religion.) How could this very secular woman deal with religion in her classroom? Consider the following thoughts she expressed. She says she wants to remain faithful to her secular position without alienating her religious students. She related an event where one student left class early and emailed her that she didn't like Christianity being attacked. (I don't suppose her methods of teaching is always accomplishing what she desires.) What she really wants, she says, is for her students to come out of accepting an outside source for authority and to think critically. (Interpreted: Leave God out of your life.) In fact, she wants them to know they don't have to believe in God to accept a spiritual "force."

There was nothing to note on this presentation. She simply told about a program she developed and used in Athens, Ohio, home of Ohio University. This was composed of pink ink put over chewing gum on downtown pavements. Neither I nor others I talked to could understand the message. And certainly we missed the "intellectual and critical thinking" part.

At the close of the three presentations the audience was give the opportunity to ask questions. After a few others spoke—and before I was asked to wrap it up—I made these observations.

"My name is George Stewart. I want to be careful how I speak because I know I am outnumbered here." To the third speaker I said I have a son who graduated from Ohio University. If I could have done it without being offensive I would liked to have said something like: "I don't think my son got his intellectual and critical thinking skills from putting pink spots on the pavement." But since there wasn't much else to say I moved on to the first speaker.

Addressing the first speaker, I told her that I was a preacher in a mega-church in Salt Lick with about forty-five in attendance. (Some laughter.) I told her that I do not think genuine Christianity is anti-intellectual. One example is a son who has a PhD. in physics and still believes in God, the Bible and Christianity. I told her that I am no fan of the mega-churches, but they represents a small part of Christianity—no more than 1,000 churches in the United States. I told her that by selecting this one church she did not get an accurate understanding. I told her that I—as a Christian—could criticize the mega-church, but she—as a Jew—could not. (Had I had time I could have explained that one has to know the genuine before they can identify the counterfeit.) But most disturbing to me—as I told her—is the idea that Christianity is like Nazism. I said I found this offensive.

Addressing the second speaker I let her know that I knew a little about Immanuel Kant (so she and the audience would not classify me as an ignorant country preacher.) I said that Kant grew up in a Christian home. She nodded agreement. I said that Kant concluded that religion amounts to nothing more than morals and these morals must come from within rather than from any external source, such as the Bible (the theme of her presentation). Again, she nodded agreement. I then said that this thinking is in serious error, because the "morals" I choose from "within' would not agree with hers, and all the others would be different.

I had much more to say, but at this point one of the faculty said I needed to end quickly because we only had 2 more minutes. (After I sat down I noticed that the question session—with friendly questions—continued much longer than 2 minutes.) I closed with this: "This meeting has had nothing to do with 'womens issues' but rather it has been political, anti-Christian and anti-authority."

After I sat down there were several who applauded. After the session ended several expressed thanks and agreement. Two young men wanted to know where our church is located.

Hundreds of philosophers—and their philosophies—have come and gone. God's truth remains. Kant also said miracles don't happen and prayer is useless.

The philosophy of Kant is popular with today's culture because it allows (they think) them to decide their own way of life without consequences.

These women—and many more like them—think that Christianity is not only false but dangerous. I would have liked to have dealt with that issue more.

After I finished my remarks the second speaker said her concerns with Christianity (external authority) are illustrated by an email she received from a student. This student wrote that she was a Christian and believed in the Bible but this conflicted with her role as a feminist. She said the Scriptures which tell her to be submissive to her husband (Ephesians 5) were hard to follow. The speaker then read part of the biblical text, conveniently leaving out the part about the responsibility of the husband. I told her I would be glad to talk to her about it.

The experienced-oriented faith is not the same as biblical faith. Biblical faith is based on facts, history, the written word and truth.

God says; The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." (Psalm 14:1)