I Don’t Want It

Desiring God just posted an article about Holly Holm. She is the woman who beat up Ronda Rousey on Saturday night during a Ultimate Fighting Championship match and sent Rousey to the hospital. One might think that given what the Scriptures teach and Desiring God’s commitment to the Biblical view of women that this article would be decrying the fact that Americans get their jollies by two women beating each other into a bloody pulp in the ring. But no. Instead this article praises Holly Holm for her humility and selflessness.

The article cites Proverbs 16:18, “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.” Ronda Rousey was the arrogant, loud mouthed, braggart, while Holm is the humble woman who overcame all odds. The author ends his article by comparing Holm to Jesus

The UFC now has a new kind of queen on the throne. The reign of this queen will have a fresh flavor, marked by humility and quiet confidence that echoes a true and better king. Such a counter-cultural reign, no doubt, will be underappreciated, even mocked, by the world. It won’t capture the attention and hype of a Rousey reign, but it will leave its mark, and remind us of the path and calling of the true champion.

This is one of the more astounding statements I have seen in print in a long time, especially coming from a conservative, Christian blog. A Christian woman, created by God to nurture and care for children, commanded by God to have “a gentle and quiet spirit,” (I Peter 3:4), created by God to give life, as her mother Eve did (Genesis 3:20, I Timothy 2:15, 5:10, 14, Titus 2:4) and yet here she is praised by a PCA pastor for beating another woman up so bad she had to go to the hospital. She has spent her life beating up other women for pay and somehow she is model for other Christian women?  She is going around kicking other women in the head and somehow she is like Jesus? The article shows how far the church has fallen from the Scriptural view of what women are and who God made them to be. Holly Holm is a Christian. I cannot doubt that and nor should I. But her model of womanhood is so far removed from the Scriptural pattern for females that she should not be praised for what she is doing. 
Here is why those of us who believe in the classic roles of men and women in church, home, and society think so little of many 21st century complementarians. They cannot even get the basics right. Yes, there are gray areas, but this not one of them. Women beating each other to a bloody pulp in a ring for money is not a gray area. Women donning military garb and heading into battle is not a gray area. Women busting down doors to arrest drug dealers is not one of them. Women refusing to marry and have children or marrying and refusing to have children so they can pursue money is not one of them.  Too many complementarians want to push almost every distinction between men and women into the culturally conditioned gray area. When an article like this gets published by a complementarian leaning blog is there any wonder we want to go back to the term “patriarchy.” If this is the fruit of complementarianism then I don’t want it. 

7 thoughts on “I Don’t Want It

  1. We can have an exciting conversation on Sunday, then. Haha. I was a bit hot under the collar when I wrote the above (shocker), but I stand by it and don't think it makes me any less of a complementarian. Mostly I think it's much ado about nothing, though. Women's boxing/UFC/MMA (even the male versions, to a degree) are marginal sports at best and a silly thing to get worked up over as a matter of theological import, unless it's one's own daughter who's considering it, of course.


  2. Brittany, I think you missed a crucial part of one statement you criticized: “…so they can pursue money.” Scripture is clear that there are “eunuchs for the kingdom” — people who choose to remain unmarried to pursue some other high calling, but pursuing money ain't a high calling. Marriage is normative, and those who remain unmarried either are obeying another high call, are providentially hindered, or are in rebellion.

    In the meantime, it's amazing how spoiled you and I are. We live in a fraction of the world during a fraction of history when we can be unmarried and on our own and not end up in the poor house or on the street or starved or enslaved. Arguing about how Scripture applies to this novel circumstance is a luxury. We've got much to be grateful for!


  3. A day late and a dollar short. Or maybe just a minute late and a penny short. ;^)

    I'll leave my first comment in hopes that it'll be helpful even without the context.


  4. Thanks to all for the comments. I just showed up and never saw Brittany's original post so I cannot be angry at her! I am not sure what the original concern was. From Kyriosity's reply I can see Brittany may have been upset about my statement about women refusing to marry and have children. I tried to state that carefully, I know there are women who want to and cannot on both fronts. But my aim was at women who refuse marriage to pursue a career or choose marriage and refuse children for the same thing. I hope that was clear. Brittany if you want more explanation I would be happy to give it.

    It is not so much a critique of MMA, though that could certainly be made. But I was more upset that DG decided this was a good article for their site. As for it being much ado about nothing, the DG post has 6.5K shares, which means a lot of folks at a conservative leaning blog think Holly Holm is a good model for Christian women.


Comments are closed.