In protestant theological institutions: a critical appraisal of contextual challenges in kerala, india jessy jaison b b s., M d

1.5.4 Criticism of the Use of Sexist Language

Feminists of all times have been conscious of the role of language-in particular, the imperialism of language-in the social, economic and political oppression of women. The use of sexist language and male orientation in ministry alienates women and undermines their contributions.

The words we use are seldom neutral. When others speak to us we are usually touched, both consciously and unconsciously. We may be delighted, informed or hurt by the way they speak to us. Similarly, others may be delighted, informed or hurt by the words we use. Words have power. The words we use transmit fact, ideas, emotions and values; they thereby shape attitudes, influence action and change or reinforce other’s perceptions.⁹²
Christian feminists have contributed to the debate around linguistic issues that have often relegated women to a very marginal status in society. According to Oduyoye, “Women fall victim to linguistic imagery that socializes them to accept their place in society and to view with caution any call for more space.”⁹³ Criticism of the language of the Bible features substantially in feminist linguistic arguments. Generally, feminists are not at ease with the language and culture of the Bible. The Biblical text has been understood as patriarchal, hierarchical and oppressive to women with its obvious male-oriented language. In their attempt to reread the Bible and critiquing its ideology, a number of feminists have reached positions that are totally antagonistic to Christian faith. Ruether evaluates, “The more one becomes a feminist the more difficult it becomes to go to church.”⁹⁴ Mary Daly’s ‘The Church and the Second Sex,’⁹⁵ and ‘Beyond God the Father’⁹⁶ are examples of extreme reactions to the perceived male-dominant nature of Christianity. The sexist language used in the policies, curriculum descriptions and the learning materials causes problems for women who wish to work towards equality. For them it is discriminatory and, therefore, should not be tolerated.

1.5.5 Consciousness-Raising at Male-stream Epistemology

The attempt at consciousness-raising against the male-stream epistemology, developed and nourished by the traditional structures, is basic to the feminist view of education. Weiner describes the assumption of radical feminism, which holds that to be aware of the effects of male domination, women have to undergo a process of women-focused education (or reproduction) known as consciousness-raising, a concept developed in 1960s. “Consciousness-raising is a means of sharing information about female experience and was used as a means of education for women in the absence of a comprehensive knowledge-base on women.”⁹⁷ Despite the incredible potential of this in enabling women to understand themselves, their needs and so on, this simultaneously involves the danger of developing an extreme one-sided, reactive perspective on life and learning.

To transform theological institutions into places of contextually relevant education, organizational change must occur. Beverly Haddad called for the ‘structural transformation of institutions as well as teaching programmes.’⁹⁸ For her, the ‘engendering of theological education should be a value and a goal of the institutions’, which is termed as “gender mainstreaming”⁹⁹ in theological education. Unless these difficulties are dealt with efficiently, ‘the vision is not a vision of possibility.’¹⁰⁰ Among the major difficulties Peggy Ann Way points out are an:
over focus on academics and the conscious suspension of practical ministry; Difficulties in defining and experiencing the nature of community (seminary); Difficulties in defining the nature of ministry, clarifying the relationship of ministry to a curriculum rooted in scholarly pursuits; Challenges to greater inclusiveness of women in relational, experimental and discussion systems; Continuing lack of flexibility and creativity in pedagogical styles and a failure to experiment with different approaches in relation to varying content areas or desired results¹⁰¹
Weiner, referring to Hekman, argues “Both feminism and post modernism are especially concerned to challenge one of the defining characteristics of modernism, the anthropocentric [male-oriented] definition of knowledge.”¹⁰²
The feminist approach insists on holistic learning that integrates the cognitive, affective and psychomotor dimensions in learning. The Cornwall Collective reports, “In our programs we associate education with consciousness-raising in its best sense, because we believe that education has always been and is necessarily a most important form of socialization and politicisation.”¹⁰³ Farley suggests that feminism may be one of those forms of faith that contributes to a new ‘habitus’ but he does not use feminism as a resource in the ‘Fragility of Knowledge’¹⁰⁴ for rethinking the structure of theological study.¹⁰⁵ Feminist accounts of the theological education of women, then, deal with a variety of issues and have gone through paradigm shifts, influencing the main stream of theological schools with examinations of the existing system. Women’s affective experiences, however, are not taken into account in many cases. Education has been evaluated and criticized for its consistent effort to divide the cognitive aspect from the affective, which brings undesirable control over the student who would ultimately experience frustration and uncertainty, lost in the knowledge of the academic disciplines but with no development or transformation in life at all. The accumulated knowledge, in most cases, does not contribute much to the future of those concerned. Feminist critique holds that consciousness-raising is essential for transformation.