One complementarian slogan that sounds great is that “men and women are equal in value, but different in role.” While I agree partially with this statement, I think it is misleading because of what many complementarians actually mean when they say this. If this statement were blatantly false, it would have very little sway. But a clever catchphrase cannot forever mask the ideology behind it. “Pro-choice” is another clever catchphrase. Who could ever be against choice? But it doesn’t sound so good anymore when you realize that this “choice” is the “choice” to kill your unborn baby. Slogans are not very useful at conveying complex ideas. That is why I want to discuss what lies behind some people’s minds when they say: “men and women are equal in value, but different in role.”
Equal in value
First, let me lay out why I think this slogan rings true. We read in scripture that God created humanity as male and female in the image of God. That means that men and women both reflect God in this world; both are equally made in his image. Both complementarians and egalitarians believe that men and women are equal in value.
Gender roles
Where the partial truth lies, in my opinion, is in the saying that men and women have distinct roles. I actually agree that men and women have specific roles unique to them. As biological creatures, men and women have different bodies that limit what we can do within society.
Women’s roles
Women can gestate, give birth to and feed human babies with their bodies. No man can nourish a baby the same way a woman can. With this great power comes great responsibility. A mother is therefore responsible for taking care of the baby in her womb and ensuring safe entry into this world. She is also uniquely positioned to provide her child with breastmilk for the first few months of the baby’s life[1]. This biological reality significantly impacts many women’s lives, whether we like it or not. It can also affect women’s careers since many women choose to stay at home or to work less when their children are little. Our biological reality does affect the roles we take on in society. However, each family can decide what is best for them in how they distribute tasks or roles.
Men’s roles
Men, in general, are physically stronger and faster than women. With great strength also comes great responsibility. It makes more sense for men to defend their family, friends, or fellow citizens against physical threats than to send weaker women or children[2]. Women can defend others, but it is natural for the strong to protect the more vulnerable. This is why we see more men police officers, firefighters, soldiers, or construction workers. These jobs require physical strength for which men are well suited. Strong women have entered these fields in small numbers and do bring other assets to the table, but they are usually not as physically strong as their male colleagues.
So yes, men and women have different roles dictated by their physical bodies. Women are limited in their physical strength, and men cannot bear children.
Authority and submission as roles
However, this is not usually what complementarians mean when they say that men and women are equal but have distinct or separate roles. What is generally meant is that men have the role of exerting loving servant leadership, while women have the role of submitting graciously to that leadership. Here is how it is put by two complementarians:
“A husband’s role is to sacrificially and lovingly lead. […]A wife’s role is to lovingly submit to her husband.” [3]
Hans Molegraaf
And,
“Male and female were created by God as equal in dignity, value, essence and human nature, but also distinct in role whereby the male was given the responsibility of loving authority over the female, and the female was to offer willing, glad-hearted and submissive assistance to the man. Gen. 1:26-27 makes clear that male and female are equally created as God’s image, and so are, by God’s created design, equally and fully human. But, as Gen. 2 bears out (as seen in its own context and as understood by Paul in 1 Cor. 11 and 1 Tim. 2), their humanity would find expression differently, in a relationship of complementarity, with the female functioning in a submissive role under the leadership and authority of the male.” 4]
Bruce Ware[
Complementarians identify the “roles” of authority and submission as what ultimately defines masculinity and femininity[5]. These “roles” are assigned to us based on our biology. If you are female, you are the submissive sex. If you are male, you are the ruling sex. These roles are not interchangeable according to complementarians.
Logical fallacy
The belief that men and women are equal in value is incongruent with woman’s subordinate status attributed on the basis of her female essence. If women are subordinate in “role” to men because they are female, then in their being (ontologically), women are subordinate and inferior, not equal, to males. In this system, there is a permanent hierarchy between men and women. Men will always have more authority than women; they are not equal in authority.
This is categorically different from hierarchies that are based on merit or circumstance. For example, A company’s CEO is not ontologically superior to or different from his subordinates.
When we identify authority and submission as what mainly distinguishes men and women, we are talking about an ontological hierarchy, not merely the roles one takes on in life. In this system, a woman’s authority or leadership is less valued than a man’s. Nor will a woman’s gifts be as valued as a man’s. So how can men and women be considered equal in value if there is an indisputable hierarchy between them?
Rebecca M. Groothuis puts it this way:
“Regardless of how patriarchal gender relations may be explained or masculinity and femininity defined, the fact remains that woman’s subordinate role is determined exclusively and necessarily by her personal nature; that is, solely on account of her being female she must be subordinate. Therefore woman’s role designates not merely what she does (or doesn’t do) but what she is. She is female; she is subordinate.”[6]
Rebecca M. Groothuis
The incongruence of this belief system is automatically recognized when we apply the same logic to race instead of sex. If we were to say that in society, white people should hold the leadership roles because they are white and that black people should have the subordinate role because they are black, we would immediately realize this is incongruent with the belief that white and black people are equal in value. In fact, the subordination of black people in the form of slavery came about precisely because black people were believed to be inferior to white people.
We forget, but until recently, the belief in women’s inferiority was what justified their subordination. Complementarians have abandoned the traditional belief in the inferiority of the female sex yet want to retain their subordination. But ideas of group superiority lose their grip when we fundamentally believe in the equal worth of all human beings. A unilateral subordination of women to men is incompatible with the principle that men and women have equal value[7].
Conclusion
Are men equal in value but separate in roles? Well, yes and no. It is obvious to most that men and women are different, so different roles make sense. But I fail to see how submission to men can logically follow from being female without implying inferiority in essence. Rather, women are made in God’s image and thus are God’s representative on earth, called to rule and subdue it alongside men. To rule is not the prerogative of males, just as submission is not the prerogative of females, but of all Christians, as we are all called to submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
[1] With modern technology, it is also now possible to feed newborns with formula, but this was not always so. In the past, children would die if breastmilk could not be provided either by their mother, wet nurse or expressed milk. With formula or expressed milk, men can feed newborn babies. However, many mothers do decide to breastfeed their children.
[2] Women and children also have the added danger in a war of being taken for slaves or raped.
[3] Hans Molegraaf. “Equal Value + Right Roles = Healthy Marriage.” Marriage Revolution. Nov 12, 2019. https://www.marriagerevolution.org/equal-value-right-roles-healthy-marriage/
[4] Ware, Bruce. “Summaries of the Egalitarian and Complementarian Positions.” The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW).June 26, 2007. https://cbmw.org/2007/06/26/summaries-of-the-egalitarian-and-complementarian-positions/
[5] There are many different complementarian theologies. I do not want to put them all in the same boat. Some complementarians may not agree with this statement that these roles are what define femininity and masculinity. But the two quotes I provide demonstrate that some complementarians do identify authority and submission as the roles that men and women are uniquely called to by God in relation to one another. With this logic, a woman leading men in the church would be going against her God-ordained role to submit to men (certain interpretations of 1 Co 11, 1 Tim 2).
[6] Groothuis, Rebecca Merrill. “Equal in Being, Unequal in Role” Challenging the Logic of Women’s Subordination. In Discovering Biblical Equality: Biblical, Theological, Cultural, and Practical Perspectives. Third Edition. 2021. IVP Academic. P.473 Scribd edition
[7] Some people may choose to continue to believe in a thought system that is illogical because they strongly believe it is what the Bible teaches. They may choose to believe that God has his reasons that we are unaware of.
