The Value of the Person

I was reading a post today at a blog called "Out the Door." John Battern wrote a post about an article published on the UM Reporter. It is an interview with Dawn Eden regarding her new book, The Thrill of the Chaste: Finding Fulfillment While Keeping your Clothes On. (The article is written by Mary Jacobs, and you can find it at this link).

What bothered me about John's post and the interview with Eden is the supposed link between feminism and sexual freedom. Let's look at a few statements:

From John's post: Eden points out that contrary to what the sexual/feminist revolution tried to pass off as the way to liberation and self-fulfillment,... I haven't included the end of the sentence, because it's not the focus of this post. What I want to point out is that the sexual revolution and the feminist revolution are not the same thing. I think that feminism -- or at least the battle for equal standing in society for women doesn't begin and end with sexual freedom. To me it is essentially about the idea that women are not second class citizens. In the eyes of God, men and women are all children.

Also from John's blog: For where do people turn when they discover that the promises of the sexual/feminist revolution are lies; consumerism. The theory is that by "keeping" women single, business interests benefit, because, to quote Eden, "You don't see a married woman with kids blowing her Christmas bonus in the shoe department at Macy's." First of all, if anyone thinks that mothers (and fathers) don't spend money in our society, they are just crazy. Secondly, the fruit of feminism is not necessarily a single life. In fact, marital status has nothing to do with equal rights for women -- at least not in our modern society. I can be married and have my own identity -- have my own equal status to men. One of the goals of feminism, I believe, is that I have that choice. I can be single. I can be married. My marital status does not define me.

What do I believe?

• Men and women are children of God. In His eyes, one gender does not have a higher value than the other. In battling for equal status, I am fighting for others to see me as God sees me.
• One of the forces contrary to that goal is generalizations. When others see me through the filter of what he or she believes women to be, then that person is not seeing ME. This is a danger not only for women, but for men as well. We all need to be approached and dealt with as individuals -- not as stereotypes. To do less -- for either sex -- is to devalue us.
• The sexual revolution and the feminist revolution have become intertwined because of the double standard which has and does exist for men and women regarding sexual freedom. This article once again highlights that double standard.

I haven't even approached the idea of promiscuity, chastity, intimacy or extra-marital sex. That's actually the focus of the article, and I must say that there are points which Eden makes which I agree with. However, I do not think that we can discuss these issues until we separate them from the idea of feminism. At least, I can't.