The headlines are bold: “Kirsten Dunst Sparks Debate Over Support For Traditional Roles”.
Uh oh. She didn’t dare.
“I feel like the feminine has been a little undervalued… We all have to get our own jobs and make our own money, but staying at home, nurturing, being the mother, cooking – it’s a valuable thing my mum created,” Dunst told this month’s edition of Harper’s Bazaar in the U.K.
“And sometimes, you need your knight in shining armor. I’m sorry. You need a man to be a man and a woman to be a woman. That’s why relationships work…”
If the silence is deafening anywhere, it certainly is not in the media response to Dunst’s unexpected opinions. Feminist magazine, Jezebel, struck back at Dunst. “Kirsten Dunst is not paid to write gender theory so it shouldn’t surprise anyone that she’s kind of dumb about it.”
But is Kirsten Dunst Dumb?
Or is she simply stating what many of us already think?
For years now, feminists have been trying desperately to blur the lines between men and women, so that all are in essence the same. Differences, to feminists, are dangerous. Particularly those which highlight strengths unique to men.
The Christian world has debated long over gender-role semantics. The Bible clearly advocates for unique roles for men and women, and portrays that these differences, are meaningful. In an effort to qualify what is meant by the respectful pursuit of equally valued marital roles, the term complementarian was borne.
What is complementarianism?
In an article for Desiring God blog, Andrea Froelich explains: “Being complementarian doesn’t mean believing that the man’s job is to fix the car and the woman’s is to wash the floor. It goes much deeper than a breakdown of jobs”.
Rather, complementarianism takes into respectful account, the strongest strengths of both husband and wife. And by necessity, this definition relates back to the analogy of Christ and His Bride. Just as a bride and groom approach the wedding day with one goal- to be married- both are specific in how they dress, the emotions they feel, and the subsequent expressions of that emotion.
The beauty of a complementarian theology is the unashamed recognition of differences. It is, in the words of Kirsten Dunst, letting a man be a man and a woman be a woman.
Why are these differences so threatening to the feminist argument?
Well, because feminism is not really interested in equality. It is interested in superiority. Feminist theory is at heart, opportunistic. It craves power. And it wants always, to raise women one rung higher on the ladder.
In so doing, men are diminished to a place where they are not needed, and hence, not wanted. I am afraid that this generation will see an increase in marriages which have fallen victim to the fierce cry of: I am woman, hear me roar.
As Christians, we delight in the fact that God created man and woman separately. And we draw confidence from the fact that when God looked upon His human creation, He declared it good. Male and female, created intentionally for differing purposes.
Kirsten Dunst was on to something when she spoke up the other day. In the Christian realm, we call it complementarianism.
In God’s realm, it is simply deemed GOOD.