If you’re like me–and lets hope you are:)–then you’ve been anxiously waiting for the 11th season of America’s Next Top Model. As I’m sure you already know, there has been a lot of “internet buzz” about the full inclusion of a competitor named Isis, who is the first female contestant actually born male. Although this show has consistently failed to provide a legitimate “Top Model,” its value as another enjoyable vehicle for dramatized social engineering (think back to when the Real World was good) is limitless.
Now, this post is not about the specifics of transgender people per se; rather, its about the broader concept of human identity in light of two topics we often discuss: freedom and the Gospel. Obviously, this is a huge topic, so I just want to make a few observations and see what you think.
For those (all) of us who love Reality TV, it should have come as no surprise that this season the concept of “gender identity” would be brought to the fore, because much of what constitutes this genre is simply a slightly less scripted iteration of the older “morality tale” shows that dramatized contemporary social issues. Webster, Different Strokes, The Facts of Life, Silver Spoons etc. have given way to Road Rules, Beauty and the Geek, and, of course, The Real World.
Whether its through the coverage of the now famous “pregnant man,” or recent articles like Save the Males, the fact is that the questions surrounding what constitute a “real” man or woman, combined with the technological ability to decide for oneself his/her “gender identity,” has brought the debate to the masses. What is going on in ANTM (as we call it) this season is the logical manifestation of a genre that began as the guilty voyeuristic pleasure where, from the comfort of your own couch, you could watch people attempting to create specific identities for themselves in front of a live audience. With this season, we’ve perhaps seen the beginning of the end of “normal” Reality TV. Gone are the days when the “geek” wanted to get made over as a “jock,” or the “artsy” girl who wants to be the “prom queen;” when the very question of what sex you feel like you are is on the table, everything else pales–and the ratings will probably confirm that.
And this brings me to Mad Men. Well, I’ve finally gotten around to watching it, and it’s just as good as Browder said; however, what I’ve been struck with is how pervasive the same question–the one of human identity–is in this show as well. Set in the beginnings of the birth-control-fueled emancipation of women from “traditional” societal roles, this show is a painful look at sublimated rage that takes the form of workaholism and silent desperation. Even as both the women and men in this world take a large measure of comfort from fulfilling their respective roles, the resentment from this forced confinement drives them further apart.
Needless to say, I love both of these shows, and I appreciate the, admittedly, extremely varied ways they address a similar question.
Mad Men paints a sardonic portrait of the “good old days” where there was no arguing about the given answers to the question of human identity—men were men and women were women and everyone knew what that meant. Essentially, the whole show is a depiction of the different ways the characters attempt to relive themselves from this oppressive weight. But, that was then, and this is now.
What ANTM is arguing today is that these questions are left for us to decide, and whatever we decide is ok. What is fun for us is that “Reality TV” gives us the ability to observe these questions being worked out in front of a “live studio audience.” So, according to ANTM (and in the words of the Kinks) Girls will be boys and boys will be girls/ Its a mixed up muddled up shook up world.
But, the question is, is that freedom?
The supposed allure of complete self-definition, while promising the ultimate freedom, has actually enslaved people to their own capricious desires. Today, unlike any other time, the problems inherent in the slavery of self-definition have been exposed in such a dramatic (and entertaining) way, that the specific message of a genuinely inclusive Gospel that redeems humanity and establishes the proper foundation for self-understanding can be heard and understood in a similarly dramatic (and hopefully entertaining) way.
A genuine conversation about what constitutes human identity can only be done in a context that acknowledges and understands the deep scarring and fearful realities where most people live in regards to their own identity. This fear is tragically exacerbated by a universally felt need for a message that addresses both the desire for self-authentication and the necessity for external definition. This is the fearful corner of our hearts where the message of the Gospel sheds a very unique light. It is only in this light—the one that is very skeptical about any claims about ourselves other than the expression of our need for a Savior and our hope for redemption–that perhaps we can begin to explore the differences between men and women without (hopefully) institutionalizing false ideals based upon (thinly-veiled) selfish projections. I realize that this is almost impossible, and—like in the Ordination or Baptism vows—our only reply to this whole issue can be “We will, with God’s help.”
COMMENTS
3 responses to “The Lady(?) Doth Protest Too Much”
Leave a Reply
Great stuff. This is a timely address, especially for the church where the oscillation is even more evident. On one hand, we have ‘muscular Christianity’ which tends to over-identify the person with their gender (Wild at Heart). On the other hand, we see the progressive movement within the church attempting to nullify gender roles/identification by ‘androgynizing’ the human being. I’m obviously generalizing, and would love to hear some more thoughts as it pertains to the church specifically. Come to think of it, feminist theology, liberal though it is, may also fit into the ‘over-identification’ camp as well.
I love this post J. The quest for identity is seen everywhere all the time. Whether it’s the hipster living in Brooklyn, the Steeler fan in Pittsburgh, the surfer in California, or the transgender model (to ironically use some stereotypes) the common thread is that everyone is trying to define themselves. Which implies a very scary truth: we do not know ourselves.
We understand others in terms of categories, and we try to understand ourselves the same way. It’s because it is an unsafe thing to not have definition nor to be able to define someone or something that is beheld. Often we need to define others in order to define ourselves in light of them. Sum them up and put them into category in order to say “I am not in that category.” (Think of Luke 18 when the Pharisee defines himself against the tax collector: “God I thank you I am not like other men…or even like this tax collector.”)
What if we do not fully know or understand ourselves? Isn’t that the ultimate in helplessness? What if I don’t even know what makes me tick or what motivates me to do what I am going to do next? I think the worst part is that we all have a sneaking suspicion that what makes us tick is not good – Romans 7. We spend our lives trying to deny the fact that in our thought life we are motivated by jealousy, hatred, fear, lust, etc because we can’t be defined that way…that can’t be our identity. If it was then that would mean that we have no hope in ourselves, a frightening thought to a culture built on the idea of the autonomous individual.
The amazing thing about the Law is that it tells us our identity first: sinner. Again Luke 18, “God be merciful to me a sinner.” There is no more posturing, no more categories, no more self-definition. The Law, as Jesus presents it in Matthew 5, defines us as failures in need of salvation. Then the best part happens – the cross.
The Gospel breaks into this dire situation and redefines us: saved sinner, loved sinner, forgiven sinner. Every other “identity” out there will disappoint. The Gospel levels the playing field: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ.” – Galatians 3:28.
Dylan: you bring up a good point about (non-orthodox) feminist theology (yes, there can be orthodox feminist theology). There seems to be this great striving to read the bible from a (i hate this word and idea) gynocentric point of view that inadvertently distorts the actually “woman restored/woman liberated” passages of scripture. There is such a strong move to read the bible from this perspective that men become the enemy: a woman can’t trust what a man has written so we must read into texts as women to get to the real meaning for women. I find this to be a great danger to biblical studies; it’s something I pray God keeps me from in my own studies.
Sean: Your comment really hit home for me. one of the things I hate about being pregnant is that it defines me as a certain type of woman and all other aspects to me (even the follower of Christ aspect) gets relegated to the back burner (if it’s put there at all!). The first thing people want to talk about with a preg. woman is her pregnancy and then, of course, baby stuff. As if these are the only things this woman thinks of. When I was pregnant with Quinn, all my classmates would talk with me about my preg. or prep for baby; out of the window went any of the scholarship i was working on or classes I was taking or things I was working on for my job. It really grated on me. My identity, as you have so gracoiusly and articulately put it, is not in the biological things that define me (my uterus and it’s growing size and the life living inside me) but by Christ (Gal. 3:28). It’s not the my sex becomes void or obsolete (not in the least, this would recreate loneliness that God called “not good”); it’s just that, in Christ, under the new covenant, sex doesn’t define how one approaches Christ nor does it define them as a human: Christ does the defining. This is completely antithetical to our society today. God forbid our sex and, thus, our sexual activities does not define us…where would that leave us…as you clarified: in an “unsafe” place. And, as you put forward in better words than I can, this “unsafe” place is exactly where the Cross is. If we get to a place where all our saccharine identities are surrendered (not by our will but by His might), then we can finally hear Him call us by name: brother and sister. No matter what I call myself or what other people call me, I am first and foremost Sister in Christ to Christ. This is the only identity I need; too bad it’s not satisfactory enough for my flesh.
Jady: awesome post…i think Daniel and I will have to watch this MadMen show; I don’t think I can get him to watch ANTM…though, when we had TV, I would watch it when he worked late.