Sex, Gender, and New Age Stereotyping
Exported from Holy-Writings.com on 2026-06-21 - 1 clipping

Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Lata Ta'eed, Sex, Gender, and New Age Stereotyping, bahai-library.com.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Sex, Gender, and New Age Stereotyping

Lata Ta'eed

published in Bahá'í Studies Review4:1

London: Association for Bahá'í Studies English-Speaking Europe, 1994

Abstract: A fundamental teaching of the Bahá'í Faith is the
equality of the sexes. The question of sex and gender is addressed on two
fronts. First, the need to abolish culturally produced differences between
men and women as one path toward equality because sex stereotyping is spiritually
unhealthy. Secondly, in order to do this we must challenge the theoretical
inconsistencies inherent in our Bahá'í discussions. Failure
to do so has reinforced male supremacist ideology. Individual inner transformation
must precede the outward expression of sexual justice

Introduction

Human beings have always created ways of living together. A vision
of people creating balanced, egalitarian and harmonious communities
is familiar to Bahá'ís who have read 'Abdu'l-Bahá's
invitation to create unified communities: "strive ye with all your might
to create, through the power of the Word of God, genuine love, spiritual
communion and durable bonds among individuals," so that "mankind's divergent
peoples could gather within the shadow of the Word of God."(1)
Living as one implies an act of communion or spiritual intercourse among
individuals. The achievement of equality between men and women is a prerequisite
to planetary peace. Only then may communities evolve toward greater perfection
based on a new order and new ethics.

Prompted by the deluge of feminist literature and the impact of the
women's movement on social perceptions, Bahá'ís have begun
to examine in greater detail the semantics of equality as revealed in the
Bahá'í Writings. Various articles appeared in a range of
Bahá'í publications in the 1980s examining the question of
gender in the equality debate by utilising different viewpoints and perspectives.(2)
In this phase of the debate, the perceived differences between the sexes
was judged to be the chief source of female oppression. An analysis of
sex roles led to the argument that the polarisation between masculinity
and femininity may be replaced if Bahá'ís adopt a "hybrid"
model through "the co-operation and sharing for both men and women in reducing
the dichotomy of power, roles and behavioural styles."(3)
Transformation of society may then be achieved by "feminising" the male-dominated
social structure, on an individual scale and by affording women the opportunity
to enter into all spheres of the public.(4)
It was a strong assertion that anatomy was not destiny, and that spiritual
equality was guaranteed to women in all religious scriptures.(5)

This paper does not attempt to test the Bahá'í Faith fully
against the criteria of patriarchy(6)—to
discuss this would take considerably more space. Instead, it is a small
attempt to evaluate critically our understanding of the terminology of
gender used in the Bahá'í Writings. If it is accepted that
the Bahá'í Writings "contain important propositional truths
and not just moral injunctions,"(7) then
it is essential to highlight theoretical inconsistencies inherent in arguments
and discourse which focus on what "feels" right and is plausible as opposed
to what is logical. The danger of ignoring rationality (of which logic
is a part) is to leap to unfounded conclusions which in practical terms
do more "harm" than "good" despite springing from good Bahá'í
motives. Gender relations are complicated because both men and women exhibit
an astonishing range of human behaviours which have evolved under the umbrella
of patrilineality and patriarchy over centuries. The intention of this
paper is, therefore, to assess some of the present interpretations of Bahá'í
Writings on the equality of the sexes so that we can move into the future
with some degree of clarity.

Masculinity and Femininity

When asked if women are different from men, most of us would answer
"yes", and if asked to describe the difference, we would list characteristics
related to personality and behaviour which in our minds differentiate the
sexes. Researchers into the psychology of sex and gender argue that biological
sex and social gender are separate concepts from a developmental point
of view. Sex implies the biological sex of a child; that is, is a person
an anatomically male or female member of the human species? Gender is the
culturally and socially shaped group of expectations, attributes, and behaviours
assigned to that category of human being by the society into which the
child is born. So children acquire a sense of their own sexual identity
as male or female early on in life as a response to social expectations,
manifested in the environment of the family, and in the interaction of
parent and child. These expectations determine what behavioural traits
a boy or girl should have in order to be identified as a boy or girl. These
traits are commonly referred to as masculine and feminine characteristics.
Masculine characteristics are those usually associated with human males
and feminine characteristics are those more commonly found in human females.

Social psychologists have for years constructed a catalogue of gender
characteristics or behaviours.(8) They suggest
that men have instrumental traits: they are tenacious, aggressive, dominant,
curious, ambitious, responsible, analytical, competitive, self-reliant.
Women, on the other hand, have expressive traits: they are affectionate,
obedient, responsive to sympathy, gentle, loyal, sensitive, yielding, gullible,
irrational, cheerful, childlike. A commonly held interpretation is that
each trait is attributed to all or none of the members of one sex with
the conclusion that all women are different from all men.

From a number of divergent viewpoints, there are several difficulties
in the perspective that one gender trait is attributed to all or none of
the members of one sex with the conclusion that psychologically all women
differ from all men. Empirical studies indicate that gender differences
in male and female ability are neither as extreme nor as numerous as commonly
believed. Statistical generalisations allow for considerable overlap of
shared characteristics between the sexes.(9)
The socio-psychological viewpoint argues that many of the observed differences
between male and female personality and behaviour are rooted in polarised
and stereotyped cultural expectations of men and women. The theory is that
many of these differences are "learnt" rather than genetically determined.(10)
Thus, if gender qualities can be learnt, they can also be "un-learnt" or
modified to fit a new social pattern that accepts both masculine and feminine
attributes in both men and women. In other words, "androgyny" is the norm,
(from "andro" meaning male and "gynae" meaning female).

From a Bahá'í viewpoint, the concept of androgyny appears
reasonable and, more importantly, attainable. It is, therefore, promoted
as a blueprint for social change because androgyny in the Bahá'í
context "represent[s] a balancing of male and female qualities within each
person, providing for individual and gender differences."(11)
'Abdu'l-Bahá is frequently quoted as confirming the validity of
this viewpoint:

Hence, the new age will be an age less masculine, and
more permeated with feminine ideals, or to speak more exactly, will be
an age in which the masculine and feminine elements of civilisation will
be more evenly balanced.(12)

Two questions follow. Does 'Abdu'l-Bahá insist that we become andro-gynous
beings, and can this in itself be effective for the transformation of society?
It appears reasonable to assume that moving toward a "third gender" between
the male and female would mean that gender would no longer be the primary
source of identity and social position. It follows that people would simply
treat each other as individuals with both masculine and feminine characteristics.
Neither patriarchy or matriarchy would rule and people would be free of
the restraints of sexual stereotypes and the stigmas of deviance.

It is interesting to note that transsexuals, men who feel trapped in
the body of the opposite sex, take on the behaviour and appearance of women.
They do not, however, attempt to be sexless entities but boldly manifest
"feminine" qualities and undergo surgery in order to be wholly "female".
The possibility for transsexual men to be female and feminine by assuming
external cues of female beauty and reshaping male sexual organs supports
the view that the possession and expression of characteristics, behaviours,
values, etc. (both "masculine" and "feminine") is unrelated to biological
sex. Therefore, we can reverse the effects of sex-typing; for instance,
men can learn to be more nurturing and women to be more assertive.

The concept of androgyny is, however, confusing because striving to
become androgynous beings forces us to interpret so-called male and female
characteristics as permanent attributes of individuals. Thus, qualities
labelled as feminine or masculine do not compose one's identity, but define
it. Androgyny, then, becomes a meaningless ideal which cannot transcend
the dichotomy it seeks to invalidate. So a woman is feminine as opposed
to female and her femininity appeals to masculinity as opposed to maleness.

A further crucial point is that, quite apart from disagreements people
may have about what may be considered male or female characteristics, there
are two different lists at issue. One is the supposed inherent differences
between men and women and includes many of the negatively held attributes
(such as "gullible," "yielding," "illogical") which in turn justify the
social position of women as inferior to men. The other list of feminine
traits concentrates on the virtues thought of being "proper" for women,
such as "tender," "shy," "sensitive," and so on. The danger of this kind
of monopoly on sexuality has led to the concept of femininity as the preferred
expression of femaleness rather than the real thing. Thus "woman" denotes
a particular identity as a separate type of being recognised as the "other."(13)
There is then something against "nature" if women exhibit characteristics
usually reserved for men, such as aggression or self-reliance.

'Abdu'l-Bahá categorically states that "the world of humanity
consists of two parts or members: one is woman; the other man"(14)
and makes the term "man" and "woman" synonymous with "male" and "female"
respectively. In doing so, 'Abdu'l-Bahá does not, as generally believed,
relate feminine qualities solely to women, or masculine qualities solely
to men. On the contrary, 'Abdu'l-Bahá makes a very important point
when he describes these feminine "qualities" as "ideals," as quoted above.
He reiterates this assertion several times: "In some respects woman is
superior to man. She is more tender-hearted, more receptive, her intuition
is more intense." And again in addressing women, he states: "and as regards
tenderness of heart and abundance of mercy and sympathy ye are superior."
In this way, 'Abdu'l-Bahá directs our attention to human qualities
and virtues rather than specific qualities possessed or expressed solely
by one sex or the other. He also informs us that "women and men alike are
the revealers of His [God's] names and attributes, and from the spiritual
viewpoint there is no difference between them."(15)

The spiritual nature of women and men is of paramount importance in
the Bahá'í Writings. Bahá'u'lláh states that:
"the servants of God and His handmaidens are regarded on the same plane."(16)
This propositional truth is affirmed throughout the Bahá'í
texts. As Hatcher puts it:

humans are not just the product of some combination of
hereditary and environmental influences. Rather, there is a third aspect
to individual character which derives from an objectively existing, nonmaterial
entity called the soul or spirit. The soul is the locus or seat of the
individual's personality and self, and is endowed with certain intrinsic
or inherent capacities, which constitute one's spiritual capacities.(17)

Spiritual capacities for understanding, love, volition, justice and so
on, cannot be actualised by women if they are oppressed by men. 'Abdu'l-Bahá
also points out the unreasonableness of believing that women are lesser
beings: "the assumption of superiority by man will continue to be depressing
to the ambition of woman, as if her attainment to equality was creationally
impossible."(18)

In a society where the whole system is organised on the basis of male
superiority (that is, patriarchy), oppression comes in many forms, some
of it in disguise. On a physical plane, women are oppressed by the greater
physical force of men, the extremes of which result in aggression and violence.
There is economic oppression where women are dependent on men for survival.
This does not necessarily mean material deprivation but because of the
inequalities of the job market and inadequacies of child provision, men
wield greater monetary power and decide who will be the "haves" and the
"have-nots".

The worst type of oppression of women is spiritual oppression because
this goes to core of one's being. It is oppression which says to women
that they are inferior beings, worthless and valueless. Even though we
might dismiss the validity of sex stereotypes as analytically meaningless,
(that is, they are socially constructed) their immutable presence in our
thoughts, culture and language indicate loudly that they are not meaningless
in their influence. A belief in femininity and its correlate, masculinity,
sets in motion a prescriptive process with defining parameters within which
concepts of "normal" behaviour are contained. Thus, the notion of normality
introduces the male as the frame of reference against which women's behaviour
is measured. The female is, therefore, the deviant from the norm.

"Living with the enemy," women have internalised subordination and accepted
a system where, in relation to men, they are less strong, less creative,
less rational and less worthwhile in every way. By being "inferior" to
men, women are regarded as well-adjusted human beings. It is interesting
to note that in a study of sex stereotypes, it was discovered that the
concepts of a healthy male were indistinguishable from those of a healthy
adult, but concepts of a healthy female were inconsistent with ideas of
adult mental health.(19) Additionally,
we are told in the Bahá'í Writings that if woman's aspiration
toward advancement is checked by man's superiority then "she will gradually
become hopeless."(20) The impact of long-term
oppression is "learned helplessness" a psychological condition that renders
anyone, and in particular women, submissive and self-sacrificing, eventually
leading to self-denial and a lack of self-worth and self-confidence. As
such, gender relations can be "characterised by the helplessness of one
member and the helpfulness of the other."(21)
It is, therefore, argued that women as helpless individuals have less intrinsic
worth because of their so called defective ways, such as being over-emotional
and unreasonable.

Women who show potential for, or attempt to develop other characteristics
"normally" associated with men, such as initiative, intelligence, assertiveness
and so on, are dismissed as exceptional or unusual, if not "abnormal",
but certainly "un-feminine". The precise pattern of human behaviour is
then governed by certain rules. The general rule for women is that in order
to be respected and taken seriously, they have to behave in prescribed
"feminine" ways according to a complex network of psychological and socio-cultural
expectations. This is a truism despite the remarkable changes in the lives
of women in the past few decades. The reason is that women, weary of the
battle of working towards active participation in the public sphere and
fighting for support on the domestic front with home-making and child rearing,
are inclined to a situation described as "faute de mieux," a French expression
whose English translation roughly means "for the want of something better".
Unable to change men or to influence and/or control their actions, women
find that they have no choice but to accept their lot.

Many women today accept the traditional division of labour because they
believe that to some extent it is "the way of the world," acknowledging
that men and women are "different" in the ways they "think" and "feel."
Men have different perceptions about important things such as work or children.
A majority of women describe themselves as "lucky" because their partners
"help" with the children, "contribute" to house-work, cook, and "assist"
women in other things traditionally regarded as the domain of women. It
is regarded as natural for men to pursue careers single-mindedly as long
as they put in a minimum but acceptable input into domestic affairs. "Such
a compromise is not doomed to fail, in fact it produces comfortable relationships."(22)

So what is so wrong? The supreme irony is that nothing has changed,
and the same problem persists. Both male and female sex stereotypes remain
and are actively (although largely unconsciously) sustained by women. Men's
inability to emotionally express themselves to women, their fear of intimacy,
their single-minded approach to work at the expense of domestic responsibilities
is considered to be "normal". Men still feel ashamed of their own sensitivity
to suffering and love because they are taught to regard these as feminine
and weak/negative qualities. As long as one's male partner shows some decent
human qualities, women are "grateful" and "thankful" that their partners
do not go around behaving like baboons. Material success in terms of income
and career are man's reward for being kind and taking an interest in the
family. Women still view men as the stronger sex: "he takes the children
out and comes home full of energy. I simply flop down with exhaustion"
and "he is able to manage so many things all at once, he remembers to pay
the bills, knows when the children have their dental appointments," "I
am useless at these things."(23) These
things are a truism: men know how to direct and delegate but women's caring
skills remain invisible.

Separate spheres

The significant universal difference between the sexes is that only
the female has the ability to carry, give birth, and nurse the offspring;
an ability with no counterpart in the male. Can we correlate natural biological
functions with so-called "feminine" attributes? One may not presume that
there cannot be any inherent feminine characteristics, if by this is meant
non-sexual differences which tend to accompany the sexual ones. It is also
equally true that women may have been "conditioned" or socialised in such
a way that allows them to be more nurturing, maternally inclined. At present,
the extent to which our knowledge and understanding of the significance
of biological deterministic ideas which relate specifically to gender is
impoverished by an insistence on reductionist explanations. It is, therefore,
difficult to answer the above question.

If gender, however, is constructed as the "key" to an individual's "true"
nature or "inner being", then it begs the question: what is the true nature
of women and, in particular, to what extent do women differ, or do not
differ from men? If we are not convinced that "pure masculinity and femininity
remain theoretical constructions of uncertain content,"(24)
then we imply that there is a genetic or instinctual basis for certain
differences between men and women. If men and women are different then
we may be justified for having different expectations of them. This leads
us to a philosophical point that Janet Radcliffe Richards has examined:
Men and women should have different functions in society, and that each
sex should avoid the character and activity which is the proper reserve
of the other. The conclusion is that men and women should occupy "separate
spheres" and be treated in ways suited to their natures.

The separate spheres argument, at first sight, appears to lend support
to the thorny issue of the diversity of functions assigned to women and
men in the Bahá'í Writings. 'Abdu'l-Bahá categorically
states that "it is the mother who rears, nurtures and guides the growth
of the child. This is not the function of the father."(25)
The validity of the separate spheres argument provokes two significant
considerations. But before we look into these, we need to separate the
activity of mothering into two aspects: the first is the experience of
mothering and the second, the institution of motherhood.

The experience of biological pregnancy and the subsequent attachment
process with a child has within it great potential for creativity and joy.
It is not woman's ability to procreate that is the basis of their enslavement,
but the integration of this enslavement into a system of political and
economic power over women. Thus, it is in the cultural meaning of motherhood
(by virtue of laws, culture, medicine and so on) that effectively dictates
the constraint upon women. Pregnancy is still, on average, treated as an
illness which can be "cured" by technological intervention; there is still
a chronic lack of good child-care provision for working mothers; career
breaks jeopardise the return to work when the children are more independent.
Mothering is a largely invisible undertaking because it does not have a
monetary value in the way that work does in the public arena. In addition,
the activity of mothering is closely allied to home-making, an invisible
work-place.

The first consideration with the separate spheres line of thinking is
that the problem of inequality of the sexes does not lie with the existence
of these spheres but the nature of them. The Bahá'í claim
is that mothering is an activity which is under-valued rather than mis-described.
Mothering is to be valued. The education of girls takes precedence over
the education of boys because women are the first educators of children.
The Bahá'í writings indicate that women as mothers are entitled
to different treatment than men, such as the ordinance that men must provide
financial support to mothers, the fact that nursing mothers do not need
to fast, and so on. Sexual division of labour, however, may not (theoretically)
result in sexual inequality since women are actively encouraged to participate
in all public affairs, and, in the education of children, girls and boys
must follow the same curriculum.

The Bahá'í writings do not prescribe motherhood as an
obligatory function (although procreation in the remembrance of God is
encouraged). Once a woman chooses to have children, mothering is her "primary"
but not her only responsibility. Furthermore, she is not expected to shoulder
the enormous responsibility of raising a child on her own but may expect
to have emotional and economic support from her husband and the community.
Fathering, too, is a serious function but different to that of "mothering",
and fathers have the responsibility to provide economic support and educational
opportunities for their children. Fathers may make good "mothers" and,
although this is not their primary responsibility, it is essential in the
formation of a happy family unit.

The second consideration is an apparent maternal revivalism that is
often present in our discussions of mothering and motherhood in Bahá'í
communities. The attempt to fight the coercive ideology that motherhood
is of little value (and hence, women have nothing of value to contribute
to society), has been accompanied by an attempt to celebrate the creative
and rewarding aspects of the institution and the experience. Unfortunately,
this attempt has tended toward an exaggerated focus on women's so-called
"feminine" qualities which make her a good mother. Such "feminine" qualities
as sensitivity, understanding and empathy are necessary for successful
mothering but undue emphasis on such qualities in women further stereotypes
the role of women solely as nurturers and men only as providers. Thus,
women have no more than "compensatory glory", a word, coined by Mary Daly,(26)
a feminist theologian, who suggests that a unilateral focus on the function
of women as mothers limits their options of potential growth in other areas.

The Privilege of Power

According to Lynda Birke, a biologist, "part of the stereotypes of
femininity and masculinity in our culture is the dichotomy between passivity
and aggression."(27) The dichotomy lies
in viewing women as the "helped" and men as "helpers." Defined in this
way, men are stronger than women since general convention dictates that
the strong help the weak.

The consequence of a relationship based on unequal strength is dealt
with in 'Abdu'l-Bahá's writings where he warns us that until and
unless men and women "are equal in strength, the oneness of humanity cannot
be established, and the happiness and felicity of mankind will not be a
reality."(28)

By making us aware of the necessity of equalising strength between women
and men, 'Abdu'l-Bahá makes the connection between strength and
power. Is strength, however, synonymous with the term "power?" "Power,"
as is currently understood, is the ability to do what one chooses; the
more power one has, the more options are available. Power is equated with
the freedom to choose. However, more often than not, freedom is defined
with respect to the individual rather than in collective terms. In this
context, power is a sign of personal success for those who have it, and
a personal failing for those who haven't got it. Therefore, to raise the
question of power is to threaten the freedom of those who have it. Yet
this is not the type of power that 'Abdu'l-Bahá spoke about because
no threat is directed at either men or women. We all have power—the capacity
to influence, alter, affect the lives of those around us. Such a transforming
power is affirmed by 'Abdu'l-Bahá as being latent in women, and
contrary to the more populist definition of the power of dominance and
force used by men, he further redeems the power of love and service as
a means of non-controlling well-being, which brings about "empowerment"
of both women and men.

Complementarity

In discussing the nature of the relationship between men and women,
'Abdu'l-Bahá states:

The world of humanity consists of two parts; Male and
Female. Each is a complement of the other. Therefore, if one is defective,
the other will necessarily be incomplete and perfection cannot be attained.(29)

The current usage of the word "complementarity" involves an unequal relationship:
one consisting of one person giving and the other receiving. This is similar
to the inequality of power between women and men, as discussed above. The
concept appears to be radically different in the Bahá'í writings
where the use of the term "complementary" denotes a symmetrical relationship
between a man and a woman, whereby mankind and womankind are "parts of
composite humanity" "for each is the complement and helpmate of the other."(30)
It is, therefore, not for men to "give" equality or for women to seek to
"gain" it from men. More importantly, complementarity is neither similar
nor synonymous with the notion of differing functions.

The concept of complementarity appears to extend beyond men and women
to encompass the universal system of creation: "When we look upon creation,
we find the male and female principle apparent in all phenomena of existence."(31)

This is similar to the Yin/Yang principle present in Chinese culture
which does not, contrary to popular Western belief, associate the masculine/feminine
with moral values. What is good is neither yin nor yang, but a dynamic
balance between the two. What is bad is imbalance.(32)
Again endorsement of this perspective comes from the writings: "The world
of humanity has two wings - one is woman and the other man. Not until both
wings are equally developed can the bird fly. Should one wing remain weak,
flight is impossible."(33) The bird is
unbalanced when flying with one wing, be it female or male and, interestingly,
'Abdu'l-Bahá does not label the female as the weak wing. In his
talks in the West, he challenged the nineteenth century paradigm of femininity
that women were weak and dependent, but emphasizing that female subjugation
was not "due to nature, but to education."(34)

Conclusion

In her poetic discourse Response, Bahiyyih Nakhjavani touches
on a personal truth:

It is an act of supreme vulnerability to be able to extend
our arms outward in response, in spite of doubt. It is a gesture at once
trusting and entirely free of expectation. It is the first step toward
self-sacrifice, for we may assume that in the process we are losing something
of our own identities.(35)

It is a truth that seems difficult to grasp despite the knowledge that
the system which oppresses the planet oppresses women. This is why planetary
peace is directly linked with the full and unconditional emancipation of
women. Responding to the threat that the system poses by becoming vulnerable
to internal and external change means freeing ourselves from its oppression.

Solzhenitsyn speaking through his character Roitman in the darkness
of "The First Circle" contemplates how the world can be put to rights—do
you begin with yourself or others? Shakespeare's Hamlet gave part of the
answer: "This above all: to thine own self be true"(36)
thus confirming Bahá'u'lláh's advocacy: "man should know
his own self and recognise that which leadeth unto loftiness or lowliness,
glory or abasement."(37)

This is the starting point. Change must be self-initiated. Many wise
Bahá'ís have listed ways and means of achieving this change
in practical ways. These ideas need recognition (especially the education
and care of children) and practical support. Yet the secret to success
remains with the individual—the personal is political. The French Writer,
Emmanuel Reynaud puts it eloquently in "La Sainte Virilite":

When a man finds himself stifled by the meaninglessness
of his life and makes an effort to put a final end to his patriarchal power,
he will not have far to go to find the enemy. The struggle has to start,
above all in himself. To get rid of the 'man' embedded in himself is the
first step for any man getting on the path towards getting rid of power
altogether.(38)

Personal change requires a shift in attitude and a catastrophic shift in
perception, or "seeing with the eye of God," a wholly possible thing since
human beings are so malleable. Some may argue that the answer lies in conceptualising
a world in such a way that it leaves the "feminine" and "masculine" behind.
We cannot escape from our material identity and more importantly, the principles
of feminine and masculine is an inescapable facet of God's creation. Masculine
and feminine imagery weaves its way through the writings, in particular
throughout Bahá'u'lláh's revelation, from the use of nature
as a dominant motif for analogy and metaphor (for example, the symbolism
of a tree, branches and leaves is used to describe the Holy families of
the Báb and Bahá'u'lláh) to other feminine elements
such as Bahá'u'lláh's statement about the Word of God, whose
physical manifestation is the Mashriqu'l-Adhkár, the
Bahá'í temple, referred to as the "Mother Temple."

The idea of actualising the feminine and masculine elements of civilisation
has little to do with gender politics which dictates that present social
structures treat women as the "other", a non-being and at a disadvantage
to men. Rather, the Bahá'í writings reiterate that the emancipation
of both women and men has largely to do with the unfolding of God—a process
which involves the creation of a new era in which women are free to become
who they are, real and significant. 'Abdu'l-Bahá states that "Divine
justice demands that the right of both sexes should be equally respected
since neither is superior to the other in the eyes of Heaven."(39)
He, however, directs humanity to address the question: "what, then, constitutes
the inequality between man and woman?"(40)
The answer, he said, lies in the denial of human virtues and privileges,
of education, of opportunity, of success and prosperity, to women. 'Abdu'l-Bahá
gives us both a dire warning of uni-dimensional thinking and a certain
promise to men if only they lose the fear of challenging the present coercive
ideology: "As long as women are prevented from attaining their highest
possibilities, so long will men be unable to achieve the greatness that
might be theirs."(41)

Change can be a risky and dangerous undertaking, or it can be liberating.
It is a choice that has been overlooked by many with stunning nonchalance.
But rather than become victims of self-lobotomy, we could give some thought
to the most pervasive and enduring reference to the feminine by a Manifestation
of God. Bahá'u'lláh addresses the Revelation which He has
created :

Step out of Thy holy chamber, O Maid of Heaven, and inmate
of the Exalted Paradise! Drape thyself in whatever manner pleaseth Thee,
in the silken Vesture of Immortality, and put on, in the name of the All-Glorious,
the broidered Robe of Light. Hear, then, the Sweet the wondrous accent
of the Voice that cometh from the Throne of Thy Lord, the Inaccessible,
the Most High. Unveil Thy face and manifest the beauty of the black-eyed
Damsel, and suffer not the servants of God to be deprived of the light
of Thy shining countenance.(42)

Divinity is "feminine" in some of its attributes and she is magnificent.
By bearing this in mind we may be able to explore the textures of human
nature and emotion which are conducive to spiritual communion between individuals.
Otherwise, gender stereotypes and sex roles will dictate the nature of
our political reality, and impose political constraints by determining
what, within that reality, is to be held sacred.

End Notes

'Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá (Haifa: Bahá'í World Centre, 1978) 246, 278.
See Peggy Caton (ed.), Equal Circles: Women and Men in Bahá'í Communities (Los Angeles: Kalimát Press. 1987).
Caton, Equal Circles 143.
The Universal House of Justice cited in Women: A Compilation, (London: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1986) 11-12.
Lata Ta'eed, "Beyond God the Father," (Transcript of lecture delivered at Conference on Men and Women, Landegg Academy, July 1988) 10.
Patriarchy is defined as "the power of the fathers: a familial-social, ideological, political system in which men—by force, direct pressure, or through ritual, tradition, law and language, customs, etiquette, and in the division of labour, determine what part women shall or shall not play, and in which the female is everywhere subsumed under the male" (Adriene Rich, Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution [N.Y.: W.W. Norton, 1976] 57-58).
William Hatcher, "Scholarship: A Bahá'í Perspective," The Journal of Bahá'í Studies 1.2 (1988): 35-46.
See S.L. Bem, "The Measurement of Psychological Androgyny", Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 42 (1974): 156-62.
Indeed, there is an on-going argument in scientific circles regarding what is called the "under-reporting of similarities" of shared male and female characteristics in academic publications. See Anne Walker's unpublished paper entitled "The Equality of Men and Women," (Switzerland: Landegg Academy, July 1988) 37.
The definition of learning to be male or female is inappropriate because it is not similar to acquiring competence (e.g. learning language skills to express ourselves more fully), or acquiring the habit of behaving in one way rather than another in certain situations. It is learning to "prefer" to behave "like a girl" rather than "like a boy". It is also worth noting that although there are slight variations in feminine stereotypes in different cultures and sub-cultures, there is a consistent system of categorisation of male and female characteristics under the universal label of femininity and masculinity.
Caton, Equal Circles 143.
Star of the West (Vol. viii, no. 3): 4, cited in John Esslemont, Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era, (London: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1974) 141.
Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, trans. H.M. Parshley, (New York: Alfred A. Knopt, 1953) 39.
'Abdu'l-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1982) 77.
'Abdu'l-Bahá, Paris Talks (London: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1971) 161-2, 184; Selections 79-80.
The Universal House of Justice cited in Women 2.
Hatcher, Scholarship 43-44.
Promulgation 76-77.
Broverman et al., Sex Role Stereotypes & Clinical Judgements (in Howell, E. and Bayes, M., (eds), "Women and Mental Health", New York: Basic Books, 1981) 95.
Promulgation 76-77.
T.S. Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness (St. Albans: Paladin, 1972) 78.
Rosalind Coward, Our Treacherous Hearts: Why women let men get their way (London: Faber & Faber, 1993) 119-127.
Lata Ta'eed, "Women's experience of domestic violence," (Research Study, Abergavenny Women's Aid Ltd., 1994) 42.
Sigmund Freud, "Some Psychical Consequences of the Anatomical Distinction between the Sexes," Freud No.7 (London: Penguin, 1973) 17.
Promulgation 133-37.
Mary Daly, Beyond God the Father (London: The Women's Press, 1981) 81-82.
More Than Parts: Biology and Politics, edited by L. Birke and J. Silvertown, (London: Pluto Press, 1984) 25.
Promulgation 77.
Promulgation 134
Promulgation 133, 182.
Promulgation 374.
Fritjof Capra, The Turning Point (London: Flamingo, 1983) 68.
Selections from the Writings of 'Abdul-Bahá 302.
Paris Talks 162.
Response (Oxford: George Ronald, 1981) 68.
Scene III.
Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1988) 35.
In: N.W. Jouve, Un Homme Nommé Zapolski (Paris: Editions de Femmes, 1983) 62.
Paris Talks 162.
Promulgation 75.
Paris Talks 133.
Bahá'u'lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1976) 282.

METADATA

Views26047 views since posted 1998; last edit 2012;

previous at archive.org.../taeed_sex_gender_stereotyping;
URLs changed in 2010, see archive.org.../bahai-library.org
Language
English
Permission
publisher
History
Formatted 1998 by Chris Manvell.
Share

Shortlink: bahai-library.com/128
Citation: ris/128

select Collection:
Archives
Articles
Articles-unpublished
Audio
Bibliographies
BIC
Biographies
Books
Chronologies
Compilations
Compilations-NSA
Compilations-personal
Documents
East-asia
Encyclopedia
Essays
Etc
Excerpts
Fiction
Glossaries
Guardian
Histories
Introductory
Letters
Maps
Music
Newspapers
NSA-documents
NSA-letters
Personal
Pilgrims
Poetry
Presentations
Resources
Reviews
Scripts
Software
Statistics
Study
Talks
Theses
Transcripts
Translations
UHJ-documents
UHJ-letters
Video
Visual
Writings

home

sitemap

series

chronology

search:
author

title

date

tags

adv. search
languages

inventory

bibliography

abbreviations

links

about

contact

RSS

new
-- Sex, Gender, and New Age Stereotyping (Used by permission of the curator)