In this 1960 essay, Valerie Saiving Goldstein responds to the brand of traditional theologizing she finds to have rendered a majority of experiences of women invisible, anomalous and of less significance. She argues that the modern theology directly responds to the experiences of and social circumstances that surround and define men. She employs her feminine experience to confront the theological androcentric nature and uses it as a an important lens to investigate the human situation as had been given by male theologians such as Anders Nygren and Reinhold Neibuhr among others. Through this, she is able to put in place a feminist theological foundation that alters the trajectory of theology.
Goldstein plays a great role in promoting experience as a critical source for the ethical and theological reflection while calling attention to the marginalization of feminine subjectivity (Pg. 100). She has disputed the idea of humanity as being singular through highlighting the difference between both feminine and masculine experiences. She further and confronts the masculine reliability whereby she questions the dimensions of masculine experiences to completely capture and analyze as well as represent the human situation entirely. Goldstein also contests the masculine authority and challenges the relationship between the normative if men’s lens together with the authoritative depictions they have of the human situation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The author highlights the normative framework that operates among male theologians by challenging the single rightness nature of their ethical and theological claims. Goldstein states that theology should aim at supporting and encouraging the marginalized people and not devaluing and misreading their experiences. She gives out key examples of the misfortunes that women have often found themselves in such as making sacrifices and submitting to men for the sake of men’s happiness at the expense of theirs (Pg. 104). Historically, women have not enjoyed the similar freedom to men such as in choosing between the possibilities in their lives be it vocational, familial or political. She uses rape as one extreme way of how women get forced things that are against their will.
I would agree with Goldstein position that traditional theology has equally been detrimental towards women. Women are defined and also define themselves on the basis of their relationship and devotion to others perhaps because of the cultural and biological factors. A woman will live to please the society which a man is a part of even when what pleases that society demeans her in one way or another. Whether one is a male or a female Goldstein gives the notion that one it is alright to love oneself and act out of it without selfishness. Women have however not had the opportunity to make choices independently especially in sexuality and may take active roles, not for their own sake but to satisfy men or fulfil their reproductive functions. As Goldstein states a woman “may be quite without desire or may even have strong feelings of revulsion, and yet she may, for any number of reasons submit to the man-sometimes with sufficient grace so that he is completely unaware of her feelings” (Pg. 104).
Additionally, I agree with Goldstein when she says that the distinction between male and female begins at their tender ages where a girl prepares for womanhood and the roles that the society has set for her. The boy child, on the other hand, looks forward to manhood responsibilities and is aware that he is not as vulnerable as the girl child. Following that religion is viewed as a pillar of the society, it is important that Goldstein brought forward the issue not from just a social but a theological perspective so that theologians may seek to resolve issues on marginalization other than upholding the status quo.
Reference
Goldstein, V. S. (1960). The human situation: A feminine view. The Journal of Religion , 40(2), 100-112.
