Why I'm Basically a Cactus

*she's

Man, last year was great. Remember last year? I started Becoming Me. I was feeling more alive and connected—to myself, my friends, the Earth, the Lord—than ever before. I felt like a garden beginning to become lush and beautiful and ready to bear fruit. I felt joyful. I felt all the fruits of the spirit, really.

Summer has always been my season. I love hot weather. I love lakes and pools and summer clothes. I love dusty, red, Southern dirt. I love those really loud frogs at night. For some reason I love that intense, hot, tingly, tummy-tightening feeling of the sun hitting you and just, like, frying into you. I love thunderstorms.

Summer is intense, and I love intense. It ignites my imagination. It makes me write and grow.

I'm basically a cactus, I guess? Some people find me cute and cool; some people are like "why would you want that in your house"; definitely don't touch me; loves heat and the sun; has very specific needs, but the main one is To Be Left Alone; sometimes produces pretty flowers but they look kind of unnatural and out of character.

Long story short: I am a cactus and apparently summertime is when I do my most growing and thinking and Becoming. However, lately, in sharp contrast to this time last year, I have not been feeling "one hundred," as the kids say. I've been feeling decidedly worse.

I don't think I lost any quantifiable "progress" I may have made last year. I'm still a quasi-minimalist, I still use reusable bags, I'm still mega into the Enneagram, etc. I just feel worse.

I have too much going on inside, and I can't sort it out until I organize it on the outside. About forty seconds ago, I thought this was going to be one colossal, disorganized post. However, in simply siting down to write, my brain was able to get its crap together long enough to tell me what seven or so things are festering inside me, and each thing is definitely a post on its own.

I know that personal growth isn't ever linear, so I'm not worried and I don't feel like I'm regressing as a human. It's just ironic that this time last year, I was feeling so good and so new, and a year later I'm sitting here feeling so cluttered and so stressed.

But I know of two things will help:

1) Jesus

2) Writing it down

So brace yourself for Season 2 of Becoming Me:

Core Beliefs

Centering Prayer

Anxiety as a Body Type

Vulnerability Thoughts Part...4?

How DnD Might Be Helping Me Grow

Southern Pride

Politics and Christianity

~Stephanie

Racism: The First Step

For some reason I've been attempting to process all that has been happening in my head instead of in writing, which we all know doesn't work for me.

I care deeply and I've been wanting to say more, but I'm exhausted. I only know two ways to feel: all or nothing. The "all" was keeping me awake at night, giving me chest pains, and making me shaky. Every day is something new. Every day is some difference injustice, some other constitutional violation, some new threat to freedom.

But this morning, a couple of things hit me:

1) This may be how people of color feel 100% of the time.
2) If God gave me a love and ability for writing, then the worst thing I can do is sit on it when real things come up.

I'm not here to defend my character or be sure that you know my opinions on every facet of this issue. >deleted sentences that amounted to exactly that< If you want to go in-depth, let's get coffee and chat sometime. You know discussion is my love language.

It has taken me an embarrassingly long time to begin to see the racism situation for what it might be.

Do you remember Formspring? It was around when I was like a freshman and sophomore in high school, and it was a platform where your Facebook friends could anonymously ask you questions, you'd answer them, and they'd appear on like a rolling profile page. It was mostly used for trying to get your crush to think about you Differently, but one question and answer by a white "friend" has stuck with me for a decade:

Q: Would you ever date a black guy?
A: No, sorry, I'm not racist, it's just the way I was raised.

I remember thinking, "Wait, that is absolutely racist. What does that even mean? How can you think that's not racist? Are people raising their children not to date black people?!"

That, at age fifteen, was my first recognized brush with racism. A decade and a half on the earth, and the first time I experienced racism was as the most passive of passive observers.

And somehow I still didn't think racism was a real problem.

Some people have said that while personal racism, like the above, is disgusting and may exist, institutional racism is a myth. I can't speak to this from experience, but I think that on paper, that may be true; there may be no racist laws anymore.

Here's the thing though: as long as there is personal racism, there will be institutional racism, because people run the institutions. There ARE racist teachers. There ARE racist politicians. There ARE racist cops. It's not so much that we need to work on racist laws anymore, but racist people.

I can tell you the real turning point in my opinion of racism, and it is both ridiculous and profound.

It was walking in on Gabe watching the TV show Luke Cage a couple of years ago. I remember passing through the living room and watching for a few minutes. I kind of frowned and an absentminded thought floated through my head:

Why is everyone black?

The thought exploded into my consciousness and I made Gabe pause the show.

"They're all black," I said to him. He stared at me.

"Yeah?"

"And it struck me as weird," I continued. "My knee jerk reaction was, 'Why aren't there some white characters?'" I couldn't believe was was unfolding inside my head. "Do you know how many TV shows I've watched where everyone was white and it never even occurred to me? It didn't seem weird. It didn't seem anything. It was just the default. I see ten minutes of Luke Cage and..."

That was when it started to make sense.

The world IS different for me because I'm white. That's not my fault and I don't need to feel personal guilt for being born into this skin or what my ancestors may have done. However it IS my fault that I refused to see this sooner, and I SHOULD feel guilty if I don't fight for real equality.

I said REAL equality. Not just equality under the law, but equality that extends to dating, media, institutions, and everything in between.

Was the murder of George Floyd "racist," or just cruel? We can all have opinions on that, and the truth is, we will probably never know. But I think that might be just the disgusting, tragic tip of the iceberg.

There IS a problem. You might disagree about what it is exactly, but there IS a problem.

I'm sorry it took me so long to admit it, but I'm really glad that first step is over.

~ Stephanie

P.S. I know this can be really obnoxious and I AM trying to work on it, but the way I naturally understand things better is to challenge them and play devil's advocate. If we end up talking and I push on your ideas in a way that seems "wrong," just push back (logically). I want to understand.

5 Thoughts on Pan(ic)demic Homeschooling from a Homeschooled Kid

This post started because I wanted to share the video at the end and couldn't come up with a succinct caption. I had too many thoughts vying for center stage. I expect the result is going to be something far too long for a Facebook caption, but unusually short for a Reason in the Rhyme post.*

If you don't want to read all this, at least watch the video at the end XD It's less than five minutes long.

Thought #1: On one hand, I don't have kids, so I don't feel that it's my place to philosophize on the merits of homeschooling.

I always worry that if I make a pro-homeschooling post, parents are going to roll their eyes, curl their lips, or (EVEN WORSE) just keep scrolling because what could I know? I'm a millennial idealist without children. I should JUST WAIT til I actually have kids.

On the other hand, I was homeschooled. I don't know how hard it is from a parent standpoint, but I know how beneficial it was in the long run as a student. Did I go through phases of wanting to go to "real school"? Of course I did. Thankfully, my parents didn't let a hormonal fourteen-year-old call the shots in the family. I wanted to go to "real school" so that I could test if I would be "popular," have a locker, complain about homework, and go to a really scandalous, raunchy prom.

Instead, I was forced to make deep, meaningful friendships based around timeless, identity-shaping ideas; keep my books fifty feet from my bedroom; not have any homework ever (because you get all your work done in the normal school hours); and go to both a cute, slightly boring prom AND a really scandalous, raunchy prom (for better or worse, homeschoolers can actually go to regular high school proms as guests of students there).

I also learned how to pace myself, self-motivate, juggle deadlines and big projects, think logically, read difficult literature, break down subjects I found challenging, blah, blah, blah, now I have the skills to learn anything—different post ;)

Thought #2: I know homeschooling doesn't sound feasible for families where both parents work.

Again, I don't have kids. However, it is possible to homeschool even when both parents work. I bet if I Googled "homeschooling both parents work" I would get tons of advice and plans and suggestions.

Yep. Just did, and I did.

Also, *ahem*: YOU'RE MAKING IT WORK RIGHT NOW, AREN'T YOU? :)

Thought #3: I hope that parents who are hating public school homeschooling realize that if they did regular homeschooling, it might not be as terrible.

When you homeschool, you don't have to follow someone else's lesson plan. You CAN; if you don't WANT to write a lesson plan, there are HUNDREDS out there, and you can do them at your own pace. There are plans that involve videos. There are plans that don't involve videos. There are plans that involve lots of worksheets. There are plans that involve no worksheets. There are expensive plans, and free plans.

Thought #4: There really are lots of options.

You can even combine some plans that involve videos AND some that don't, AND some worksheets but not others. You can make school work for your family in a way that a public school teacher can't. (Even though he or she might genuinely want to, the plan that helps Johnny thrive is going to drive Susan insane, and some kind of compromise must be implemented for everyone.)

Who knows your kids better than you do? Who loves them more than you do? Who has their best interest at heart more than you do?

There are hundreds of cheap or free co-ops where your kids can mingle with other kids and learn about whatever subjects the parents feel like teaching.

There are also programs like the one I work for, Classical Conversations, where your kids actually meet in "classes" and are "taught" one day a week, given their assignments for the other four days, and do them with their families (with tons of online and in-person support).

(Thought #4.5: Public schools may have to cut down on class sizes post-pandemic? Classical Conversations' class sizes aren't supposed to exceed 8 for the younger elementary grades, 16 for the upper elementary grades, and 12 for middle and high school.)

Thought #5: There are solutions for the problem that arises when "THERE ARE LOTS OF OPTIONS."

In this day and age, you can find blog reviews and watch YouTube videos and get word-of-mouth advice as easy as breathing. Do a bit of research, then just pick something and try it for a year. Again again, I know I don't have kids, but my hunch is that one year of ANY curriculum is not going to ruin your child beyond repair. If it doesn't work, you can change it for next year.

Alrighty. *cough* Well. Here is the video I wanted to post.




~Stephanie

* It is not. It is a regular post size XD

Venting

I feel so bitter these days. Not every second of every day, to be sure. I have moments where I feel joyful or make someone laugh. But on the whole, all the things that have always annoyed me about the world seem to be increasing—in frequency and intensity.

I don't know how to explain it. It makes me want to stop being friends with a lot of people. It makes me want to stay off the internet forever. It makes me want to snap pencils in half. It makes me want to throw open my mind and spew things and watch people be taken aback (which, really, is probably just a restatement of that first desire.)

I feel angry a lot. The body-center kind of angry, where your heart beats faster and your hands tingle. The kind of anger that literally keeps me up at night. The kind of anger that can make a difference—for good OR evil, but mostly I feel the evil.

Lately I've had people complain to me about things that they're brought on themselves—I mean, just hand-over-fist, dragged those things off shelves directly above their heads and stood underneath them to watch them fall. As hypocritical as it is, I have a lot of trouble feeling sorry for people who have brought their troubles on themselves. For a person who brings many things upon herself, I have shockingly little sympathy. (Maybe that's why? Not that it makes it any less hypocritical, but maybe I lack sympathy due to the "takes one to know one" effect.)

I have trouble talking to people who complain about things they've brought on themselves. In these situations I feel physically incapable of speaking insincerely, so that leaves me saying a lot of non-committal half-truths punctuated with "LOLs." I don't want to be mean. I don't want to be ungracious. I think about all the things I've brought on myself that Jesus has loved me through and taken me back after. But somehow I still can't think of anything to say to these people that feels kind and gracious AND true.

I've also recently been the recipient of the ol' high school trick where someone passive aggressively calls you out in a disparaging Facebook status. As an Eight, I have a complicated relationship with other people's opinion of me. In one very true way, I do not care what people think of me. It is not important to me to be liked by everyone. But on the other hand, injustice makes me seethe. Unfair, disrespectful assumptions bother me, not because I care what people think, per se, but because it's WRONG; in this case, it reflects something wrong about the person who posted it, not me, and yet the person doesn't see that irony. I find this maddening.

I've also seen posts berating people for occasionally breaking the six-feet-apart guideline. The posts demand that people stop being so selfish and take initiative by always staying six feet apart. On the surface, that doesn't sound like an unreasonable request. However, when you think about it playing out in reality, it just doesn't work.

Say I'm on a bicycle and I see someone ahead of me on the sidewalk. I can't pass them because I'd be closer than six feet, so I cross the street to pass—oh wait, there are people walking on that sidewalk too, and, in THEIR effort to stay six feet away from ME, they panic/stop in their tracks/cross the street, where—uh-oh, they're in danger of being too close to the person I was trying to avoid, and the person I was trying to avoid has to run ahead to give these new people room, but then she gets too close to the person ahead of her on the sidewalk—

It is a nice thought. But in reality, you cannot expect people never to break the six-feet-apart rule. If you are so concerned about your personal safety, definitely wear a mask, stay home, precautions. But if every individual person is supposed to rearrange himself for every individual person, we're just gonna collide even worse—and no one will reach their destination.

Although it doesn't feel directly related, I wouldn't be surprised if this bitter, pent-up feeling is a side effect of quarantine. With two or three exceptions, I haven't seen anyone but Gabe in about eight weeks. I'm beginning to feel permanently disconnected from the aspects of humanity that I actually like. I'm watching as Americans become brainwashed into believing that anyone who stands up for his or her freedom is selfish. There is no other way to put that. We are being brainwashed into believing that standing up for your freedom is selfish. If your reaction to that statement is any form of, "Well, YEAH, wanting to go out in the middle of a pandemic/wanting businesses to be allowed to stay open/etc. IS selfish," then it sounds like you've already drunk the Kool-Aid.

Loving your neighbor by choosing to stay home, wear a mask, and keep your distance is a beautiful, godly decision. Embracing the government's authority to FORCE you to do those things is frightening, un-American, and dangerous. It is not selfish to want to make your own decisions.

I'm going to try to do a better job of giving this all to God. Clearly I'm currently doing a horrible job. I hope getting this out has been in some way therapeutic for me as well. It's been a long time coming.

~Stephanie

I Don't Want to Change the World Anymore

I'm not sure where this post is going. Some good posts have started out feeling like this, but a lot of others have ended up deleted. We shall see where this one goes.

I like to think of myself as a very reasonable, logical person—almost to a fault, at times. I have trouble empathizing. I don't usually care how people FEEL if it flies in the face of reason. I am a very black-and-white person.

When I was in eleventh grade, I studied American history, philosophy, and formal logic in the same semester. We dived deep into concepts like economics and Christianity. We constructed intense, rational arguments to defend our well-developed opinions. We memorized famous speeches that made us proud of being Americans, that made us want to change the world. We were going to change the world, and we declared as much to the adults in our lives.

In my memory, we were met with a lot of raised eyebrows and nods accompanied by smug looks. Sure, the expressions seemed to say. I remember when I thought I was gonna change the world. You'll grow out of it eventually. Their looks offended me and made me all the more determined to speak truth in a way that would make people listen.

I went to college to become a lawyer. I wanted to fight for justice using passion and logic. I wanted to persuade the world of what I knew to be true based on logic, history, morality. However, after an especially tedious class, I realized that becoming a lawyer was NOT the way I wanted to do that with my life. I became an English major instead, because what good are logic, history, and morality if you can't communicate them effectively?

I graduated in 2016. Election year. For all humans who had to endure that year while on a college campus, I want to offer my deepest condolences. If I hadn't already high-tailed it out of political science, that would've done it for me. Twenty-sixteen made me so glad I had evacuated the world of academic politics. To defend myself against accusations of racism, sexism, and bigotry from people who clearly must not know me was exhausting in a way that makes my soul feel tired just remembering it.

Back in high school, I loved to debate. I loved it so much that I would—and I am NOT kidding—seek out YouTube videos that went against my beliefs and engage in comment wars with strangers for DAYS. I would defend my beliefs about anything to anyone, and thoroughly enjoy myself. It might make me sad and frustrated and incredulous that some people wouldn't see the reason in what I argued, but it never discouraged me.

Now, I am tired.

Now, I understand the raised eyebrows and smug looks of the adults I encountered when I was seventeen.

It kind of makes me want to cry. It kind of makes me want to throw chairs against walls. It kind of makes me want to refuse to talk to anyone who believes differently than I do.

I feel very "done" these days. I'm done trying to get some people to see reason, and they're probably feeling the same way about me. I don't know that my logical persuasion has ever once convinced someone to change his or her opinion, and I don't know whose fault that is. Is it mine, because I'm not empathetic and winsome enough? Is it hers, because she refuses to see the error in her reasoning? Is it mine, because I'm too rigid and old-fashioned in my beliefs? Is it his, because he bases his argument on emotion? Is it mine, because I'm wrong but stubborn? Is it his, because he's wrong but stubborn?

I don't know. I'll probably never know. All I know is that talking about it does not seem to work, although I know that's what we're supposed to do. We're supposed to keep an open dialogue, be willing to listen—really listen—to people who think differently than us.

But I can tell you right now that I do not see myself changing any of my fundamental beliefs. How can I expect someone else to? *shrug* I guess I can't.

At this point, I don't want to change the world anymore; I just want to keep myself from going crazy. That seems like a big enough bite to chew these days.

Hopefully soon—now that I'm beginning to admit and process these thoughts and feelings—I will have a more encouraging, Christ-like update. Until then, don't expect me to join any comment wars.

~Stephanie

How One Line in the Christopher Robin Movie Changed Me

"What is your favorite movie?"

Until the summer of 2018, I would experience the same gentle exasperation and uncertainty as most people do when they hear this question. I am kind of a Leslie Knope when it comes to having passion and opinions ("You have an opinion on pockets"), but I did not have a favorite movie. I'd ask you to specify a genre (fantasy?) or a quality (funniest?), and even then I'd probably give you my top three to five.

But then came...

The Christopher Robin movie.

I've seen it three times (not a lot, I know, but it's important to me that I don't EVER risk getting tired of it) and cried between four and seven times with each viewing.

However, this isn't actually a review of Christopher Robin; it's a post highlighting one teeny, tiny line in the movie that has tumbled around in my head for a year, begging to have a spotlight shone on it. It might be the line that hit me the hardest, caused me to give a quiet gasp and--duh--tear up.

(I don't think this line is a spoiler for normal people, so I'm just going to talk freely about it, but if you haven't seen the movie and feel the way I do about spoilers [special circle of Hell], maybe don't read this?)

It happens when Christopher Robin and Winnie the Pooh are sneaking around outside, trying to get away unnoticed by Christopher's wife and daughter. (Pooh has never seen Christopher's family.) As Christopher and Pooh tiptoe under the kitchen window, Pooh looks in and sees Christopher Robin's wife, Evelyn.

We all know what a character says when he sees the hero's girl for the first time. "She's beautiful!" It's a given; we practically hear the line before it's said aloud.

But Pooh sees Evelyn, and says, in his husky little voice, "She looks very kind."

That is the compliment Pooh gives. That is his observation. I had seen the line's set up and assumed what Pooh would say with so much certainty that to hear "She looks very kind" actually caused my brain to pull up short and stare.

Then I realized how sad and backwards our culture must still be for me to have made that assumption.

In one line, Christopher Robin taught me that 1) physical beauty is still what we expect to be commented on, 2) innocence and character see past that, and 3) one can "look very kind."

I hope that I can cultivate a spirit such that when people see me, their first thought isn't about my physical appearance, but about whether or not I look very kind.

Excuse me, I need to go get a tissue.

~Stephanie

In Response to Lori Alexander's "Men Prefer Debt-Free Virgins Without Tattoos"

After the initial blink of shock and small pinch of indignation at the post's title, my knee-jerk reaction was,

"Because a woman's goal in life is to be preferable to men?!"

As a woman, the post's title offended me. But as I read, the body of the post offended me as a Christ-follower.

As a lover of lists and logic, I feel I won't be able to rest until I respond, tackling each of this woman's "points," which are really a collection of statements sitting atop a veritable mountain of ridiculous and unspoken assumptions.

Alexander's first paragraph is a prime example of such assumptions: "Do you know how much more attractive debt-free virgins (without tattoos) are to young men? Unfortunately, there are so few of these types of young women anymore because of the high costs of college (debt) and sexual promiscuity even within those in the church. As believers in Jesus Christ, we need to live in a way that is pleasing to Him because His ways are the best."

Main Assumption 1: All men find the same type of woman attractive. To some men I'm sure debt-free virgins without tattoos are most attractive. However, I bet there are more men out there who prefer debt-free virgins WITH tattoos, or debt-free women of any experience with no tattoos, or don't mind debt but want to be a woman's first, or don't care about debt or virginity or tattoos.

Main Assumption 2 (which she leans on more heavily later): College necessarily equal debt. Yes, the cost of college has risen (thanks, big government), but that does not mean all college graduates have debt. Because of my parents' incredible generosity and sacrifice, my sister and I are both getting a college education and will have NO debt because of it. Many people--even some women *gasp*--work to put themselves through college with no debt.

Alexander then completely changes the scope of the article from "living in a way that is pleasing to Christ" or even "why men prefer debt-free virgins without tattoos" to "reasons that women shouldn't go to college." (She never even touches on the tattoo thing.) Talk about a bait and switch! And talk about building a case on an assumption that isn't even true.

The first reason that women shouldn't go to college is because men prefer debt-free women. So, pretty much a restatement of Assumptions 1 and 2.

The second reason women shouldn't go to college is because college-educated women are unlikely to stay home and raise their children because they want to pay off debt and use their degree. I would like to point to the hundreds of women I work with who not only went to college and stay home with their children but actually home educate their children. Oh, and lots of them have careers too. College does not make women less likely to stay home with their children. The desire either to stay home or not is present in a woman's mind before she gets her four-year degree. If she wants to stay home, she will, regardless of her education level.

The next reason why women shouldn't go to college made both me and my husband (Wait, what? I found a good, godly husband despite my college education, past experiences, and tattoo?!) gasp out loud: "The husband will need to take years teaching his wife the correct way to act, think, and live since college taught them every possible way that is wrong."

This makes my blood boil. First of all, husband, if you have to "teach your wife" how to be a person, then she's probably not ready for marriage. It is not a husband's job to raise his wife; that is the job of parents, the potential wife herself, and--oh yeah--GOD. Sure, as kids (male and female) grow up, they need people guiding them in HOW to act, think, and live until they've mastered the skills and logic to conduct themselves well. However, even after Alexander's implication that wives begin as clueless, uncouth children, she is really implying that the husband should teach his wife WHAT to think.

How are women supposed to love the Lord their God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strengths if they are not allowed to use their own minds and strengths? (I'm sure there's an argument to be made here that the "strength" of women is only in child-rearing and cooking. I don't believe that, but even if it were true, what about the "with all their minds" part?)

Next reason women shouldn't go to college: "They will start having babies later in life. That is if they can still conceive naturally." Sorry, I forgot that a woman's eggs dry up and fall off her uterus at age twenty-two. *insert eyeroll emoji*

The fifth reason why women shouldn't go to college is because they lose valuable years of learning to cook large meals. To be honest, I cooked more in college than I did at home (not that that's saying much). And a lot of the time, cooking large meals is a matter of being able to double or triple a recipe. Of course, that requires math. Wait, are women allowed to do math?

Alexander goes on to say that "young women learn nothing about biblical womanhood or what it takes to run a home when they go to college." First of all, this can depend on what college a woman attends. There are such things as "Christian colleges," although maybe Alexander sees that as an oxymoron. Second, Alexander isn't insisting that college doesn't teach biblical womanhood, but that for some reason women are INCAPABLE of learning biblical principles when they go to college. Is it because our minds aren't strong enough to withstand cultural influences? Or because we aren't clever enough to seek out edifying Bible studies? Third, I feel like I learned a lot about how to run a home while in college. For the first time, I had no one reminding me to clean my room or the bathroom, or to eat enough veggies, or spend my money wisely, or remember to buy more toilet paper. Are you kidding me, Alexander? College is literally the time in your life when you DO learn how to "run a (mini version of a) home."

Alexander then talks about how women should live with their parents and work from home and stay under the protection of her father until she's transferred to her husband's keeping. Whatever. I don't care if a girl chooses to live at home or not, and fathers do offer some protection. None of that is sufficient reason not to go to college.

And lastly, the other gasp-inducer: "Most girls have not read the Bible with their father (Ephesians 6:4) or husband to explain to them (1 Corinthians 14:35)." I'm wondering if the original author threw these verses in hoping that no one would actually investigate them, because they are

"Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord." (Ephesians 6:4)

and

"If [women] want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (1 Corinthians 14:35)

At first glance, that second one could be pretty damning, I guess, but the first one? "Dads, don't be annoying. Lead the family in a godly way." How do you get "women can't read the Bible for themselves" from that?

In 1 Corinthians 14:35, scholars believe that Paul was referring to some specific kind of inquiry or speech of women. Earlier in chapter 11, he both references women prophesying in church and says that women should have a symbol of authority on their own heads, so clearly he isn't against women having a voice in church.

(In all honesty, chapter 11 has some puzzling passages, but one of them ends with this great equalizer: "For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God." Boom.)

Back to the original point that women need their husbands to explain the Bible to them: No. God gave me a brain and a will of my own. I will use the brain to understand the Word myself, and the will to study and apply it. Is it important to discuss scripture with your spouse? Of course! But not so that the woman can have the Word interpreted for her like she's a peasant in the Dark Ages and her husband is a controlling Catholic priest. You study the Word together so that both man and woman can learn from each other, digging deeper and sharpening each other as iron.

Closing Thoughts:

I am deeply saddened and offended that there are people out there who believe God created women to be silent, subservient shells of humans. How rude is that to our Creator? To say that he made half the population brainless and spineless and do-less? What about all the strong biblical heroines? What about the command to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength?

What's more, Alexander implies that women are only worthy and godly when they are either married or trying to be married. Is appealing to men really the highest calling a woman has? What about living in a way pleasing to God? What about the TONS of verses that SPECIFICALLY warn against living to please men/other people? (Galatians 1:10, John 5:41-44, 1 Thessalonians 2:4, Luke 16:15, et cetera.)

Lastly, while marriage is good and created by God, it is not actually necessary for a good and godly life. Paul only even "concedes" to the notion of marriage. He says that in his opinion, it's better to be solo and focus on God. So, biblically, Mrs. Alexander, your argument fails again.

And now I'm going to go back to my life as a married, college-educated, debt-free, Bible-studying woman with a tattoo who can't wait to have kids, stay home to raise and educate them, and continue the career for which God has given her passion.

~Stephanie