“Complementarianism is the belief that men and women are ‘equal’ in value to God but have different God-given roles that complement each other,” April Ajoy, author of “Star-Spangled Jesus: Leaving Christian Nationalism and Finding a True Faith,” told HuffPost.

“It enforces stereotypical, traditional gender roles and focuses on women’s submission to male authority both at home and in the church,” Ajoy continued. “Complementarianism holds that only men can lead in the church and that husbands have complete authority over their wives. Wives are taught that God commands their complete submission and obedience to their husbands in everything.”

This belief that men and women have clear separate roles in marriage and society is quite widespread across fundamentalist Christian communities and evangelicalism.

Cait West, author of “Rift: A Memoir of Breaking Away From Christian Patriarchy,” grew up inside complementarianism and described it plainly.

“It is just another name for patriarchy, and some believers hold to it more strictly than others,” she said. “Men are supposed to be strong leaders, the heads of their households, and women are supposed to submit to their husbands in all things. The idea is that men and women who follow this “godly” plan complement each other as they serve God.”

Ajoy gave the example of Ephesians 5:22-24: “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”

“Most evangelicals who use this passage to keep women submissive to men conveniently ignore the verse right before it that says, ‘Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ,’” Ajoy noted.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 1 month ago

I've tried to steelman Christian Complementarianism in the past, reading up on their internal critiques for and against.

Everything I've read boils down to a no true Scotsman fallacy. "Yes, men can take this authority and abuse it, but then they're doing it wrong and not really acting as Christians".

No push for ways to shore up the potential of abuse. Just that men must do it the "right way", and that if they do it the "wrong way" there is no mechanism to correct them or to protect the women who are supposed to be seen as of equal value.

But it did lead me to reading about the UK's resources on coercive control https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/controlling-or-coercive-behaviour-statutory-guidance-framework/controlling-or-coercive-behaviour-statutory-guidance-framework-accessible. I found the Examples list helpful

Examples of a serious effect on the victim may include, but are not limited to:

Stopping or changing the way someone socialises

Physical or mental health deterioration

A change in routine at home including those associated with mealtimes or household work

Putting in place measures at home to safeguard themselves or their children

Changes to work patterns, employment status or routes to work Being monitored by and needing to report back to the perpetrator

Having their financial independence restricted e.g. the perpetrator denying access to money, preventing the victim from working, sabotaging employment or welfare benefits, denying access to joint bank accounts, or coerced debt

Being deprived access to medication, phone and internet usage

Feeling unable to have family or friends visit

Feeling unable to take part in activities which they previously enjoyed

Becoming socially isolated

Being told what they can and cannot wear

Emotional and psychological harms including anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder

Being punished or having to follow rules

Living in fear of punishment of any kind
  • source