How Religion and Society Contribute to Gender Inequality

Schwab Bakombo

University of Toronto

World religions are not immune to issues concerning gender equality. My goal is to explore how religion and society contribute to gender inequality. I will make use of some compelling arguments presented by scholars such as Malory Nye, Judith Butler, Tomoko Masuzawa, and others as they relate to the social construction of gender roles. Gender, as it pertains to identity, is largely based on social contexts. Religion and culture are often intertwined to the point where they can be comprehended interchangeably. Nye’s theory regarding the association of religion and culture offers a guide to understanding gender roles in religion and offers a perspective from which we can understand how religions were probably derived from cultures. In addition, it is widely accepted that gender roles are social constructs that are well-defined in almost all cultures.

The struggle for gender equality in religion is still an issue despite the progress that has been made in bridging the divide. It may be helpful to begin with careful observation of the relationship between religion and culture. The history of religion may corroborate the idea that religion informs culture and vice versa. It may also convince inidivduals that Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are social constructs deeply rooted in history. Perhaps every one of them, at the time of their conception, was constructed with specific social interests. Tomoko Masuzawa, a US professor and author of Invention of World Religions, focuses her research on the historical development of the 19^th and early 20^th century search for the origin of religion. In terms of the relationship between religion and culture, she makes a pertinent suggestion that may help to support the fact that religion and culture often inform each other; “religion is not an abstraction. It has vital significance only as it is deeply rooted in the moving process of folk life.”(Masuzawa, 2005, p.39)  Careful observation of cultures may suffice in confirming the fact that humans have, since their existence, been trying to shape social customs in order to establish a common good. Marriage, for instance, is at the threshold of complete redefinition in Canada. For centuries, most Canadians held the belief that marriage is a covenant between one man and one woman. The issue of gay marriage is being accepted by more Canadians to represent a civil rights position. It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that within a few decades, the reshaping of our customs will lead many Canadians to view gay marriage as equally acceptable.

Nye’s theory pertaining to the relationship between religion and culture presents some limitations because it may suggest that religion and culture are the same thing. “Most cultures are largely shaped by their dominant religions and vice versa.” (Nye, 2003, p.14)   The 19^th century German scholar Max Müller believed that scholars of religion should employ sacred texts as their main focal point. Müller (as cited in Nye, 2003, p.157) suggested that in order to understand the role religion plays in gender inequality, it is imperative to study religion from an exegetical perspective while also seeking to understand its cultural origins.  Scholars who ignore this suggestion offered by Müller will conduct their research “outside the sacred texts and run the risk of straying in[to] murky waters.” (Nye, 2003, p. 157) The signifier of God is commonly understood to be male. Nye suggests that “the ideology of a male god is what paved the way for the subordination of women in many societies.” (Nye, 2003, 88) Because androcentricism is pervasive in the study of religion, God is literally explained as a male person. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam teach that Adam was created first and Eve afterwards. This belief was interpreted by some cultures to mean that women are inferior to men in principle.

In the Congo, where I was born, the very culture defines the role of women as that of the caretaker of the home. The aforementioned concept is heavily challenged by the biblical “Wife of Noble Character’s” story as it is told in Proverbs 31. The moment the African man becomes a Christian, he does not lose his culture; he simply associates it with his understanding of scripture. From his comprehension of the teachings of his church, men may internalize the religion they have been taught and see it as correct. For instance, this can be clearly seen in the way we understand marriage today. The woman was made as a helper suitable for the man according to Genesis 2: 18. In verse 28 of the same chapter, both man and woman are mandated to be fruitful and multiply. The Koran, in Chapter 15, also supports hierarchy in creation. Since belief is often open to different interpretations, many societies have tried to interpret scripture in light of social constructions in order to set limitations of what is deemed acceptable in gender roles. Procreation, as the basis for matrimony, is often employed by the church in order to advocate heterosexual marriage. The consensus among many Christians, for instance, is that the existence of marriage in our society is justified only as far as it can enforce certain obligations. From a social perspective, these take the form of obligations and responsibilities serviced in procreation.

Gender identity is another complex issue that drives a lot of academic and non-academic discussions. The ideas advanced by Judith Butler are intended to bring about a lasting transformation of gender equality. Most scholars hold the belief that “biological differences between the sexes do not determine gender, gender attributes, or gender relations.” (Hacking, 7) The definition and attribution of gender roles differ from culture to culture. It appears that gender roles have become established and defined in society by men. Gender has historically been a concept devised by men because religion and culture are closely associated. This is confirmed by the fact that even the study of religion is soaked “in the pervasiveness of androcentricism.” (Nye, 2003, p.82) People may perceive gender as a social category but careful observation of the priesthood in Catholicism maintains that “the category of gender is in use among us only to benefit some members of the group.” (Hacking, 1999, p.8)

Butler argues further by proposing that “this construct called sex is as culturally constructed as gender.” (Hacking, 1999, p.8) The potential issue with Butler’s approach is that distinctions between the sexes cannot be completely ignored; it is helpful to maintain biological distinctions between the sexes. However, from a social and religious point of view, we still require progress to achieve equality between the sexes in this androcentric world. In Islam, for instance, marriage laws favour of men:

"By licensing polygamy, concubinage, and easy divorce for men, originally allowed under different circumstances in a different society, Islam lent itself to being interpreted as endorsing and giving religious sanction to a deeply negative and debased conception of women.” (Ouzgane, 1993)

Even so, polygamy seems to have been permitted in limited circumstances only. The man who estimates that his monogamous marriage has become too inconvenient may choose to justify his “fantasies” by employing scripture as a license for adding one more nuptial bedroom. It can be argued, by the use of biblical characters such as King Solomon, that ancient Judeo faith has essentially corroborated such practices. Nevertheless, the subject of gender inequality remains a fundamental issue. Thinkers like Butler voice their concern for women’s rights by way of gender construction and gender roles. The role of women in religion continues to be a struggle by virtue of equality. As we continue to make progress towards gender equality in society and religion, we must reason together and make conscientious decisions. Men and women are individuals whose autonomy and existence demand that they equally reclaim their unalienable rights. The biological difference of the sexes should be conceptually maintained for procreative purposes but society must work together and seek ways to end this debate by realizing that equality is in fact an unalienable right.  Until we find common ground in overcoming the chasm that gender construction has maintained for so long, we shall live in a world where true equality will never be realized.

An unbiased and robust study of religion may be necessary for differentiation between religion and culture while coming to terms with the fact that gender gaps need to be closed.  I believe that society, including the church, must change its views regarding the differences that promote gender inequalities. I am aware of the fact that my belief is not universal because in some parts of the world, religious establishments may be part of the problem rather than the solution. Any sacred scripture can be interpreted to lead some individuals to believe that gender differences ought to be maintained, but an unbiased analysis may also lead people to see that “in Christ there is no male or female.”(Galatians 4:28) Nye is correct in establishing a strong relationship between religion and culture even though they can be studied independently. Common hope will bring about reform in religious exegesis and cultural reshaping; after all, “change has always been characteristic of living religions.” (Masuzawa, 2005, p.39)

Ian Hacking (1999). The Social Construction of What?. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, pp. 1-10

Lahoucine Ouzgane. "Women and Islam." Postmodern Culture 3.3 (1993). Project MUSE. Web. 15 Nov. 2012. <http://muse.jhu.edu/>.

Masuzawa, Tomoko.  The Invention of World Religions: or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2005.

Nye, Malory. Religion: The Basics. New York: Routledge, 2003

http://www.biblegateway.com/

http://quran.com/