All hell is breaking out at Google, and elsewhere. Even the BBC International carried the story! While Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin were at the Burning Man Festival in the Nevada desert with 70,000 others, James Damore, a low-level employee at Google was publicly opposing the company’s reigning orthodoxy regarding the absolute sameness of men and women.[James Damore, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber: How bias clouds our thinking about diversity and inclusion ,” July 2017, go/pc-considered-harmful- damore@] As a bright young man Damore analyzed company hiring and promotional policy and publicly stated he found Google an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed. Inevitably, Damore was fired (which proved his point).
Damore had the youthful temerity to state that there is such a thing as a real woman, distinct from a real man. He declared that on average, men and women differ biologically in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because they’re universal across human cultures and they often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone. After a long and technical analysis, he concludes: “I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ [sic] in part due to biological causes…” He notes that the corporate bias to total sexual egalitarianism is pure ideology without factual proof. “We’re told by senior leadership that what we’re doing is both the morally and economically correct thing to do, but, without evidence, this is just veiled left ideology that can irreparably harm Google.”
Damore’s views do not merely question Google’s ideology but also the reigning views in the media and in the academy. The echo chambers of Identity Politics and Women’s Studies programs have developed this conviction to a science, though with little or no science! The thesis is powerfully expressed in the writings of postmodern feminist, Judith Butler. In her books, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990) and Undoing Gender (2004), Butler sees gender as “performativity theory.” Being a woman or man is not something that one is but something that one decides to do. There is no divine creation. There is only self-creation. One is reminded of the famous statement of one of the early feminists, Simone de Beauvoir, who stated in 1949: “On ne naît pas femme: on le devient”—“one is not born woman; one becomes one.” If gender is a constructed status, radically independent from biology or bodily traits, a free floating artifice… then man and masculine might just as easily signify a female body, and woman and feminine a male body.
Such a project of cultural redefinition destroys distinctions between the all-powerful state (with its official ideology) and everything else—individuals, churches, families, businesses, morals, and truth. This total flattening of distinctions, à la Burning Man, seeks to create a genderless sexuality—with no support from biology. By deconstructing sexuality, man is remade in the image of the genderless state.
Speaking of the state, in 1831 the French noble, Alexis de Tocqueville came to America to find out what allowed the United States to surpass Europe as the world’s political and economic superpower. His conclusion? Women. Essentially, stay-at-home moms. Not CEOs or celebrities. The women he saw were largely confined to the home: cleaning, cooking, taking care of children. In America at the time, no position seemed more important. Stated Tocqueville: “There have never been free societies without morals, and…it is the woman that molds the morals” as the keystone of the family, the one who held everyone else together. [Maddie Mehr, “Tocqueville: Women Made America Great,” The American Conservative (07/11/2017)].
As feminism has redefined a woman’s success to mean what she does outside the home, and as our culture destroys all gender distinctions, we see the implosion of the family, the break-up of fifty percent of our marriages, and the loss of moral principle.
The Bible is always right in the end. It reveals that after the Fall, God provided humanity with the family structure so that Eve defines her great achievement as “having gotten a man with the help of the LORD” (Gen. 4:1). Eve knew that this was her great role in civilization, producing the line that would eventually give birth to the greater Son, the Savior who would bruise the head of the Serpent (Gen 3:15). This provokes Paul to state that the woman (and with her humanity) “will be saved by childbearing” (1 Tim 2:15). Obviously women can do many incredible things, but only a woman can bear and nurture children, which, in turn protects human civilization. We mock and eliminate this glorious God-given calling at our peril. Our salvation came because Jesus was “born of a woman.”