Here’s one of my issues with the “man/woman difference makes sex beautiful” part: The Genesis 2 narrative of man/woman being created is actually a celebration of their SAMENESS! That’s one of the main points of the narrative! God says that the human was not meant to be alone, but instead of immediately providing a partner, God parades animals in front of the human to name them. And what is the human’s response after? “…but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him” (Genesis 2:20). In other words, this garden is fills with animals, but there are none LIKE ME! So what does God do? He takes one side from the human; he essentially cuts the human in half. And what is the human’s response? He celebrates by saying, “Then the man said, “At last this is bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called ‘woman,’ Because she was taken out of man”” (Genesis 2:23). Genesis 2 is celebration of humanity’s sameness, that two came from ONE! That man was provided a “delivering ally” (Bible Project) in the form of a woman to co-labor in the garden. Certainly there are differences in genders, and such differences can be celebrated too, but for Butler to say that there is “a bodily diversity embedded in our blood and bones…set in the fabric of creation” is just a complete misreading of the creation narrative. So maybe instead of writing an entire book that places such a hard divide in the roles of men and women during sex, it would be more appropriate to talk about the mutuality of the sexual union—that men and women can and should give and receive similarly, distinct at times, yes, but in more aspects, the same as Genesis celebrates.
Thanks for taking the time to parse this. I lack any Greek studies at all, so while the inferences drawn are intuitively silly it helps to see it laid out so clearly. I'm reminded of your intro, where you laid this mess at the feet of the whole collection of people who should clearly have known better and yet pushed this book to publication. I'm embarrassed for them.
Here’s one of my issues with the “man/woman difference makes sex beautiful” part: The Genesis 2 narrative of man/woman being created is actually a celebration of their SAMENESS! That’s one of the main points of the narrative! God says that the human was not meant to be alone, but instead of immediately providing a partner, God parades animals in front of the human to name them. And what is the human’s response after? “…but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him” (Genesis 2:20). In other words, this garden is fills with animals, but there are none LIKE ME! So what does God do? He takes one side from the human; he essentially cuts the human in half. And what is the human’s response? He celebrates by saying, “Then the man said, “At last this is bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called ‘woman,’ Because she was taken out of man”” (Genesis 2:23). Genesis 2 is celebration of humanity’s sameness, that two came from ONE! That man was provided a “delivering ally” (Bible Project) in the form of a woman to co-labor in the garden. Certainly there are differences in genders, and such differences can be celebrated too, but for Butler to say that there is “a bodily diversity embedded in our blood and bones…set in the fabric of creation” is just a complete misreading of the creation narrative. So maybe instead of writing an entire book that places such a hard divide in the roles of men and women during sex, it would be more appropriate to talk about the mutuality of the sexual union—that men and women can and should give and receive similarly, distinct at times, yes, but in more aspects, the same as Genesis celebrates.
Thanks for taking the time to parse this. I lack any Greek studies at all, so while the inferences drawn are intuitively silly it helps to see it laid out so clearly. I'm reminded of your intro, where you laid this mess at the feet of the whole collection of people who should clearly have known better and yet pushed this book to publication. I'm embarrassed for them.