gender equality
The Stepford Wives
So, to the third novel in my set by Ira Levin…
A ‘Stepford wife’ has become synonymous with a rather vapid but pretty woman who is subservient to her husband and loves domesticity, but when the phrase was coined in The Stepford Wives, it was telling a cautionary tale about gender equality.
Levin’s writing in the early 70s. Feminism is on the ascendant; women have choices; and other women are the ultimate threat.
The Eberhart family – Mum Joanna, husband Walter, children Pete and Kim, move to Stepford from New York City – the ‘filthy, crowded, crime-ridden, but so-alive city’.
Numbering tennis, near-professional-level photography, politics, women’s lib – especially women’s lib – as her interests, Joanna is disconcerted to find the women who are her new neighbours are completely and compulsively absorbed in their household duties; all looking and behaving like pretty, big-bosomed actresses in commercials for domestic products. She’s rather horrified when Walter decides to join the Men’s Association in order to stay in touch with local issues, but he assures her the best way to effect change is from within.
She sets about discovering why, within months of moving to Stepford, women change so radically. And why for six years there have been no social groups for them. What happened to create this bizarre town? Is it anything to do with chemicals leaking from the industrial plants in the area, or seeping into the water supply from the ground? Or are the husbands – many working in those industrial businesses – concocting something at the Men’s Association with which to brainwash their womenfolk? Or is there something even more sinister going on?
I have to confess this story isn’t my kind of book at all. Totally fantastical and unbelievable. With a highly unsatisfactory ending to boot. So, something of an anticlimax after the promise of A Kiss Before Dying. But at least I’ve discovered that fact by actually reading them for myself before being influenced by other reviews or simply watching someone else’s interpretation. And I’m now done with this author.
On a serious note …
You might be forgiven for suspecting I read only fiction. Not so. Alongside the reading I do to hone my skills as a novelist, I also study topics that relate to my ethical interests. And lately that’s been around discrimination on the basis of different-ness. I rarely talk about these books on my blog as they’re unlikely to appeal to most of my readers.
Ethics and religion are often intertwined and I’ve been trying to tease out why devout believers are often very judgemental and apparently blinkered. I’m thinking not so much of the extreme level of torturing and killing young women who refuse to conform to a strict dress code – the kind of ferocity that hits the headlines – or the fierce opposition to clinics helping women grappling with the consequences of an unwanted or unsafe pregnancy, we’ve seen in the USA this year. Rather I’m exploring the rationale behind closing the doors of the church against people who are coming to a different conclusion on topics like LGBTQ+ or gender equality. And I’m not looking in one specific direction; we see it across religions and denominations, amongst the rank and file members, as well as the hierarchy paid to lead their flocks.
I’m particularly perplexed where the Christian religion is concerned. Not just because ours is a nominally Christian country, and it’s the faith community I’ve been a member of all my life, but more because, after all, it’s a religion purporting to be founded on love – for God and one’s fellow-man/woman. Surely the God whom Jesus Christ came to reveal is bigger than the petty details his followers get bogged down in? Surely he can accommodate different-ness? Surely he doesn’t want his people to be uniform clones made in an image designed by a founder of any given specific denomination? The whole of nature is full of infinite variety – just watch a couple of episodes of The Frozen Planet II!
So am I coming from a prejudiced standpoint here? I’m trying not to. And to that end I’m looking at both sides of the argument, as far as it’s humanly and humbly possible, with an open mind. Right now I’m embedded in the issue of same-sex relationships. Talking with people who espouse differing views, engaging in correspondence with those who challenge my own understanding, and reading, reading, reading. Three books give a flavour of where I’ve been – each valuable in their own way.
Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why, by 
neuroscientist Simon LeVay, deals with the science of homosexuality from an academic standpoint; a kind of meta-analysis of the huge number of studies that have looked into a range of biological and psychological and social factors that might predispose someone to be gender-nonconformist. It’s fascinating but probably not for the faint-hearted. Suffice to say, it’s a ringing endorsement of the biological and inbuilt nature of same sex attraction on more counts than you would imagine.
By contrast, Unclobber is a much easier read. It looks at the six so-called ‘clobber passages’ in the Christian Bible that are commonly believed to say that homosexuality is a sin which God hates. Pastor Colby Martin argues that not only have these sections been misunderstood and misused, but that there is a compelling case for the church to welcome everyone regardless of their sexual orientation.
Preston Sprinkle
, an academic professor, pastor and ‘ordinary dude’, challenges Christians to look at the LGBTG+ community afresh. His book, People To Be Loved: Why homosexuality is not just an issue, is a model for how to move away from the sometimes hostile confrontational kind of exchange too often seen in the past, and towards a useful balanced discussion on the subject; to see past the distant theoretical arguments and look into the faces of real people with heartbreaking stories of rejection to tell. Like Unclobber, this slim volume seeks to put common assumptions on one side and discover what the Bible actually says about homosexuality, and then to evaluate how we should treat those who make up that divergent group. Though it’s a deeper and more methodical study of the subject, it’s very accessible, and it’s challenging. The author comes to a different conclusion from Colby Martin where the Scriptural passages are concerned (he thinks the Bible tells us that same-sex sex is against God’s will), but nevertheless he advocates the same kind of unconditional grace.
If I had to sum up where these authors take me I might say being homosexual is definitely not a lifestyle choice, it’s inherent. It’s not so much an issue to be solved, it’s more about vulnerable people who need to love and be loved – loved without footnotes, without a background check, without fine print (as Sprinkle puts it). What that looks like might differ according to which side of the fence we come down on. And that’s the crunch point – how to reach out in love.
Everyday ethics
Wow! We’re only five plus weeks into 2022, and already the papers seem to have been full of stories centred around ethical questions. Time to share a few by way of illustrating their prevalence in our everyday lives.
A survey of almost 300 members by the Association of Palliative Medicine, published on 26 January, has shown that doctors are concerned over the focus on negative and traumatic deaths, while ignoring good palliative care leading to gentle easeful deaths. They believe the public are being scared into supporting assisted dying. The timing of this is significant, given that the Government’s Health and Care Bill to legalise assisted dying within a year of the Act coming into force, is currently being processed in the House of Lords.
Current guidance for the forthcoming Scottish census is that transgender people can select their preferred sex/gender identity even in the absence of a gender recognition certificate. A feminist group, Fair Play for Women, have brought a case against this to a top civil court, calling on the judges to strike down this advice. Under present rules, a person must have a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria, live in their acquired gender for two years, and have their application approved by an expert panel to officially claim a new gender identity; under the SNP plans, self declaration would suffice.
A call has been made for compensation for the approximately 40,000 care workers who lost their jobs because of the mandatory vaccination against Covid policy, now that the measure has been deemed no longer proportionate.
The Medicine and Healthcare Regulatory Agency is proposing to reclassify a vaginal oestrogen tablet – Gina 10; a form of HRT costing as little as £2.50 per week – so that women over the age of 50 can purchase it over the counter. A consultation, seeking the views of GPs, pharmacists and members of the public, is scheduled to take place. Until now such medication has required consultation with a doctor. The proposed new arrangement might still require the input of a pharmacist.
The ongoing debate about inequality where female transgender athletes compete in women’s sport has been revisited in the case of a University of Pennsylvania swimmer who has broken records in women’s races after transitioning from male to female.
The Health and Social Care Secretary has set out a vision to make Britain a world leader in cancer care. It includes the introduction of new technologies, including vaccines, designed to boost survival rates, as well as new ways to boost early diagnosis. Even before the pandemic Britain’s survival rates lagged behind many other Western nations; since the pandemic the figures for missed diagnoses and delayed treatment have plummeted still further.
The world’s most expensive drug, Libmeldy – a gene therapy that costs £2.8 million per treatment – is to be offered on the NHS to young people suffering from a rare genetic condition called metachromatic leukodystrophy, following a landmark deal. The condition causes severe damage to the nervous system and organs, and carries a life expectancy of 5-8 years.
Recently, No10, the Treasury, the Department of Health and the NHS have been discussing a multi-million pound National Recovery Plan to tackle the NHS backlog exacerbated by the pandemic. Now the Treasury has put on ice an announcement about it, which was due to be made on Monday this week. This comes at a time of mounting unrest in Government following a series of revelations about broken Covid rules in Downing Street and unfortunate statements by the Prime Minister. Speculations abound.
The Children’s Commissioner has revealed that more than 100,000 children (1 in 4) referred with mental health issues were discharged before receiving treatment. This was the finding in a survey of more than half a million children. The Department of Health and Social Care have now committed an additional £79 million this year for children’s mental health services.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority have advised doctors to stop providing wholly inappropriate treatment to infertile couples who request unproven add-on therapies in a bid to improve their chances of having a baby. Increasing numbers of couples are asking for them after misleading claims made in marketing or internet forums.
There is certainly no shortage of topics for exercising the brain when it comes to medicine today, is there? Every one of these issues raises so many fascinating and challenging questions. Were I to continue writing novels in the area of medical ethics (still under review incidentally) there would be plenty to keep me occupied for the next twenty years!