Book Review: The Feminist Mistake
Sunday, May 15, 2005

The Feminist Mistake is an exercise for the brain, in that the amount of detail the author, Mary Kassian, presents to solidify her case is truly a bit to wade through. But those who dare to take the challenge aren’t disappointed in the least. (Just don’t plan to read it while you’re overseeing the kids as they finger-paint.) As Kassian details the progression of modern feminist thought from the 1960’s to the present, the reader is rewarded with an understanding of feminist thought on current culture and its implications for today and the future.
The book begins by tracing modern feminism with the advent of The Feminine Mystique and The Second Sex wherein groundbreaking feminists argued that society had wrongly defined women, and therefore, women’s roles were the cause of their own unhappiness, not women themselves. (Eve’s blame game is alive and well.) In order to find fulfillment, they believed that women needed to emulate their masculine counterparts and start contributing more valuable things to society than motherhood. Feminists sought to redefine themselves, and history proves that whoever defines the terms wins the argument.
After feminists succeeded in naming themselves, they won the right to begin naming society. No longer was it enough to be equal to man, now it was time to prove that they were better than the male species. Enter lesbianism and the devaluing of motherhood. Although at the time, radical feminism was viewed as on the fringe edge of the movement, it wasn’t long before the constant barrage of feminist ideals and thought found their way into modern presuppositions. Kassian’s point is well noted, but a truly enjoyable exercise would’ve been to explore these examples and their implications further.
When feminists won the right to name the world, the right to name God was just a natural progression. Kassian presents a compelling, yet disturbing trend: as society chooses a path to militant gender egalitarianism, the modern church has not been far behind. Following radical feminism are moderate feminists and religious feminists. Reading the Bible with the newspaper in hand is the basis of feminist theology. The feminization of God was not the only shocking trend; all passages that didn’t line up with their idea of who they wanted God to be were passed off as cultural in nature, irrelevant, or basically ignored. The feminists espoused an obviously radical, unbiblical concept, and Kassian documents how religious acceptance follows subtly about 15 years later to reflect those changes in modern thought. (Case in point, think the gender neutral Bible.)
In the same way, Kassian also notes that the influence of feminist thought is subtle, dangerous, and alive and well. This is the entire crux of the book, and I admit my disappointment that Kassian did not explore this with the same detail that she gave history. The modern feminist movement is not extinct; it has just so well infiltrated the culture that we don’t recognize for what it is: an assault on Biblical, God-defined gender roles. In a culture where we’re bombarded from every angle with messages from “Just do it” to “Obey your thirst”, we’d do well to remember that God alone is truth, and our satisfaction is only found in obedience to His Word.
For further reading, visit Diet of Bookworms.
15 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Amy - Great review. Fits in nicely with the conversation at Alice’s blog. I think I might have to pick this book up when I get some more “mad money” - I just went through the last of mine buying new jammies (ahh, what luxury).
Comment by Shannon Miller (May 15, 2005 @ 11:25 pm )
Amy, Good job on this review. I’ve been working on a book review or two myself, but it’s quite difficult with a young one underfoot. And you have four! I’m impressed.
FYI, I am the former Dogwood Blue. I got sick of the name and just decided to use my own
Comment by Hannah Im (May 16, 2005 @ 5:18 am )
Thanks for the informative review. My Pastor is leading our women’s and men’s (seperate times, same study) Bible Study on Genesis- and the same point that you made came to my mind a couple of studies ago. Although it seems dormant, Feminism is alive and pervasive in the Evangelical heart. It is very encouraging to see other Christian women seeking the Truth on Biblical Womanhood and not grasping in the wind for whatever trend is popular today.
Michelle
Wife of David (the real Mr. Incredible), Mother of Kelly (6 and reading,yeah!), Adria (5 and loves tea parties with Mommy), Spencer (3 and loves trains), and Wil (9 months and is crawling and pulling himself up to stand)
Comment by Michelle (May 16, 2005 @ 10:47 am )
Years ago I read her Mary Kassian’s book The Feminist Gospel. It was quite eye opening at the time for me. Thanks for the review of this book.
Comment by Kim Brenneman (May 16, 2005 @ 11:09 am )
Kim, This is a follow-up to that book. I haven’t read The Feminist Gospel yet, though.
Michelle, I’m sure you’re already aware, but I’ll mention Discovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood anyway. It’s a great compilation of “articles” compiled by Grudem and Piper, I believe, on the subject. (Someone correct me because I’m too lazy to check?)
Dogwood, I mean, Hannah, You changing your screen name is going to take some getting used to!
Shannon, Yes, I’m enjoying the conversation at Alice’s. If you’re interested in a liberal feminist’s (her words) perspective on conservative evangelicals, check out her new site.
Comment by Amy (May 16, 2005 @ 11:20 am )
Ah, man, you and Tim Challies reviewing this book in one day! Shall I take this as providence and have a little visit to Amazon?
Comment by Kim in ON (May 16, 2005 @ 1:09 pm )
BookSwarming?
In your travels around the blogosphere today you may have noticed a few reviews of The Feminist Mistake by Mary Kassian. Chances are these books are part of a program I have put in place through the Diet of Bookworms. I have scoured the blogosphere to …
Trackback by Challies Dot Com (May 16, 2005 @ 1:47 pm )
Thanks for this great review! Sounds right up my alley.
Comment by Kristen (May 16, 2005 @ 5:42 pm )
Sounds like its right up the alley of any Bible-believer, for that matter. I may have to give it a read. The downward trend of family and church in the past 100 or so years has always made for interesting study.
Comment by Rick Beckman (May 16, 2005 @ 9:12 pm )
My husband and I have been discussing feminism lately as it relates to a study I’m doing on a woman’s hair being both her glory and a ‘covering’ that is even recognized by the angels as her place under her husband in God’s chain of command.
We discussed how current day ‘views’ on a woman’s purposeful ’subjection’ to her husband is looked down upon as weak or culturally unnecessary.
I am very interested in this book, but curious if it follows Kassian’s previous book or is an easy ‘read alone’ without the former publication.
Comment by Heather L. Sanders (May 17, 2005 @ 1:24 am )
Heather - You definitely do not need to do any prior study to understand Kassian’s book. It works just fine as a “read alone.”
Comment by Anonymous (May 17, 2005 @ 9:06 am )
I read Mary Kassian’s “Feminist Gospel” years ago–and just unpacked it from boxes and boxes of books that have been in storage the past five years. . . Knowing her previous work has me interested in this new book. . .
Comment by TulipGirl (May 19, 2005 @ 10:10 am )
Nice topic. I meet so many unhappy women and listen to their endless complaints about their husbands. Few women remember to thank God for their partner in life, and pray for him daily (even if he is awful).
I think feminism = selfishness a lot of times.
Comment by peri (May 25, 2005 @ 12:01 am )
I wonder why all things need to be about god or about those who don’t believe in your god… divisive, antagonistic and paternalistic. Your message seems to be “if we don’t agree with you, we don’t care.”
Comment by dave cormier (November 19, 2005 @ 12:07 am )
Dave - because all things ARE about God.
In fact, there is no truth without Him, whether He is acknowledged or not.
If the truth is divisive, so be it, it is still the truth. I don’t think that it is antagonistic or paternalistic to state the truth; it is foolishness to ignore it.
I’m not sure why you say the message seems to be “if we don’t agree with you, we don’t care.” It is very curious to me why you came away with that feeling. Do you care to elaborate?
Comment by Greg (November 19, 2005 @ 11:20 am )