Love, American Style by Cindy Willmot

"For the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of the church." Ephesians 5:23

This weekend it rained, a lot. Sometimes, when it rains, I catch up on chores or read. But this week I decided it would be a good time to watch some of the movies we had from Netflix. We had two that were beginning to collect dust and I wanted to update our queue. One movie was peculiar. When I ordered Smother, I thought the plot sounded very modern and, possibly, worth blogging about. The movie was bad, actually. I was planning on forgetting about it until we started watching the second movie. The Odd Couple was pretty familiar. I remember watching re-runs of the TV show when I was a kid. I'm certain I never really understood the concept, but I thought it was funny. I had never seen the play or movie version and imagined I might have a better appreciation for it now that I'm an adult. I suppose it was only coincidence that both movies address the issue of divorce. Perhaps it's also coincidental that one movie referenced 1968 frequently and the other was set in 1968. Considering that I was born in the 1960s and that, last week, I used several recipes from the 1960s, I thought I should just review both movies in context of an idea that erupted from the 1960s—no-fault divorce.

Smother (PG-13) is a contemporary comedy about Noah Cooper (Dax Shephard) who loses his job, only to face pressure from his wife to have a baby. If that weren't enough, his mother decides to leave her husband and move in with the couple. Diane Keaton plays Marilyn, Noah's neurotic, insecure mother. The story revolves around Noah's attempts to placate his wife Claire's (Liv Tyler) needs and his efforts to get his Mom out of his house. The Odd Couple (G) is a comedy movie based on Neil Simon's play by the same name. The movie revolves around two newly divorced men, Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau) and Felix Ungar (Jack Lemmon) as they attempt to share an apartment together. This situation proves difficult because they have very different ideas about their new lifestyle and housekeeping.

Before I go any further, I want to say that Smother and The Odd Couple are not kid's movies. Both of these movies deal with adult themes entirely. Smother has several scenes with a scantily clad Liv Tyler trying to convince her unemployed husband to have a baby. There are plenty of sexual references. Some of these are quite graphic. There is also a scene with Diane Keaton's character smoking marijuana. While teenagers will probably think this material is funny, I don't believe it's appropriate even at this age level. The Odd Couple is fairly mild. While it would be acceptable for older children to watch, I suspect they might find the movie dated and boring. Neither of these movies, in my opinion, is worth watching as a family. I mention them here because I believe they highlight society's changing attitudes about marriage and divorce. These two movies, filmed 40 years apart, illustrate how the feelings and emotions associated with divorce have changed as divorce has become commonplace. I believe this topic is worth discussing, especially since Christians have divorce rates similar to non-Christians. So to change things up a bit this week, I am only going to reference these movies briefly. If you do watch them, I encourage you to view them in light of this discussion.

Prior to 1970, obtaining a divorce was a difficult, complicated, and often expensive endeavor. A judge had to agree there was reason for the marriage to be dissolved. The reasons for divorce were fairly clear—cruelty, adultery, desertion, incarceration, or inability to consummate the marriage. Most married women at that time were homemakers. Those who did work outside their homes often worked part time in clerical, teaching, or retail positions. The movie Smother references this fact when Marilyn Cooper leaves her husband. When she is surprisingly hired at a carpet store, she mentions that she hasn't worked since before she was married. Only a very small percentage of married women were highly educated with professional careers. In fact, the sentiment at that time was that single women worked and married women stayed home. Under these circumstances, divorce was a last resort. Husbands and wives found ways to make their marriages work, if only for the sake of raising their children. Women did not want to suffer financially and men did not want to be losers. This thought is evident in both characters of The Odd Couple. Oscar expresses his personal disdain simply by being a slob. Felix is obviously emotionally dejected. In a brief dialogue in the movie, both men admit their failure and accept that they are unable or unworthy of being good husbands. However, as Americans embraced the feminism of the 1960s, attitudes about divorce slowly began to change.

In 1963, Betty Friedan published her book, The Feminine Mystique. As a highly educated woman, Mrs. Friedan found it difficult to reconcile her social status with her career aspirations. After interviewing many of her college classmates, she discovered they shared the same sentiment. Mrs. Friedan identified this anxiety as "the problem with no name." Rather than acknowledge that they had failed to adapt to their new roles, these suburban housewives accepted the notion that society had shortchanged them. Armed with their college degrees and the newly available birth control pill, married women began to postpone childbearing and join the work force. As eluded to in Smother, these women believed their accomplishments in the workforce would be more valuable than their responsibilities at home. Many women came to view home life as drudgery and a career as the ideal.

While young mothers were grabbing copies of Betty Friedan's book, another educated woman in California was working to change the laws that she felt were treating women unjustly. Herma Hill Kay, then a law professor at UC Berkeley, was advocating for women who, she felt, were trapped in marriages. She, along with other lawyers and judges, believed that women shouldn't be forced to remain in marriages where they were unhappy nor resort to perjuring themselves in court. Perhaps some felt men were being falsely accused of cruelty where none actually existed. In either case, by the end of 1969 no-fault divorce was introduced to the United States via California's Family Law Act of 1969, championed by Gov. Ronald Reagan. Other states soon followed suit, eventually eliminating the requirement of fault as grounds for divorce. By 1970, either spouse in a marriage could petition the court for a divorce based on irreconcilable differences, even if the other partner was opposed. For those seeking divorce, the stigma attached was now gone. As a result, divorce slowly became a viable alternative to men and women in unhappy marriages.

As September 4^th marks the 40^th anniversary of no-fault divorce, Christian parents might consider the connection between divorce and feminism. During the 1960s, feminists sought to free women from what they perceived as a male dominated society. They believed the prevailing attitude of the times was preventing women from reaching their full potential and causing unjust suffering. They concluded that, by reaching their career goals, working mothers were fulfilling their emotional needs, helping attain financial stability, and giving their children independence. Their commitment was the driving force behind the influx of mothers with young children joining and remaining in the workforce. These men and women worked diligently to ensure that married women could easily assimilate into the working community. They advocated for women to receive equal pay for equal work, access to leadership positions, full time day care, and better maternity benefits. These policies actually provided an avenue for wives to meet their financial needs independent of their husbands. With adequate income and no-fault divorce, women in unhappy marriages were able to move out on their own. Currently, many mothers cite fear of divorce as a reason for remaining in the work force. It would seem, then, that when women are able to care for themselves financially, they have less incentive to reconcile a marriage. It would also seem that when women fear their husbands can abandon them at will, they have a greater desire to work.

Both divorce and feminism are in complete opposition to Christian theology. The scripture is clear that God hates divorce. Divorce is rarely a viable option for Christians, especially if they are parents. The concepts of feminism are rather difficult to define and they do not always seem contradictory to Christianity. In fact many Christian men and women embrace egalitarianism—the idea that God created all men and women equal and all are free to use their God given talents in any capacity. This philosophy is very similar to equality feminism. Equality feminism holds that, even though men and women are biologically different, they should all have equal civil, social, and legal access. In other words, egalitarian Christians see no conflict with women in positions of power or authority. This type of feminism unavoidably leads to a new wave of feminism that purports the interchangeability of men and women. This modern form of feminism sees no conflict with mothers working full time careers and fathers caring full time for the children. Roles are purely a matter of choice and practicality. This idea, also, does not seemingly conflict with Christianity. Many Christians also believe that feminism is not problematic, as long as abortion is not part of the agenda. Feminism, however, in whatever form, most often leads in one of two directions—antagonism or denial. Both of these concepts invariably deny the dignity of the person and discredit God's complementary design for men and women.

God's design for men and women can be found in Genesis. The second part of the Creation story begins in Chapter 2. God created man and placed him in the Garden to work and tend to the animals. Not one of the animals was able to ease Adam's loneliness. As a result, God created a help mate, a partner, for him. God created male and female to exist for one another. In accordance with God's will, men and women were created with equal dignity, yet they were created physically, psychologically, and spiritually different. Human sexuality cannot, therefore, be reduced to a simple biological function. As the Scripture illustrates, men and women's relationship to one another was good from the beginning. Once sin entered into the world, God's original plan of equality, love, and respect was lost. Feminism seeks to exploit that deficit further. In a response to men's abuse of power, women respond by seeking power. Rather than complementing each other, men and women fight against each other, denying the dignity and value of the other person's unique qualities. In an effort to avoid being dominated, both men and women attempt to deny their sexual differences all together. They minimize sexual differences and place a greater emphasis on cultural norms. Once again, this attitude denies the dignity of the human person and elevates the rights of one person over another. Neither of these concepts is theologically sound.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who believes that it is not possible for men and women to have a traditional marriage. This is a sad reflection of our society. Christians should be able to reject this. Christian men should uphold the femininity of women. Christian women should respect the masculinity of men. Feminism does not offer a Christian any means to do that. Men and women are made for each other, to rely on each other, to help each other. This was God's design from the beginning. Modern society often has its own ideas about equality and justice. More often than not, these ideas are not compatible with Christianity. Many ideas that have become commonplace are often accepted by mainstream Christians as well. Feminism and divorce are fully embedded in contemporary culture. Now, they are slowly taking a stronghold on Christianity. It is my prayer that Christian parents begin to reject these modern concepts and return to the Christian example of marriage. Our future depends on it.