Genesis 3:16 – A description of female psychology?

I decided to give the bible a reread today, starting with the book of Genesis. Usually, I would simply read through the new testament, or favourite old testament books like Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes  for my daily quiet time. My way of doing quiet time is to read through the bible so as to be reminded of Christian values that I should live by. But I have obtained some ideas from reading blogs that I can study a certain passage of the bible more in detail for my daily quiet time, and write out my thoughts and ideas on the passage on my blog. It seems like a good way to internalize what I am reading, and to make my reading of the bible a more active one, rather than a passive one, and to help me articulate simmering thoughts that I might have on my mind whenever I read the bible. And it would also be a way for me to engage my friends who read my blog and bring them in for my bible study quiet time as well. Hopefully I can write something enlightening or thought-provoking, and I could certainly benefit from comments from people as well.

One thing that interested me that I thought I should study about while I was going through the book of Genesis today was the part of the fall of man in chapter 3 in which God pronounced judgment on the various characters involved.  I have always found the part to which God pronounce judgment on the woman quite curious. In Genesis 3:16, God said to the woman, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

When God pronounced this judgment, did he address this specifically to Eve alone, or is it a judgment that applies to the entire female gender? A literal reading would suggest that it was specific to Eve. From my understanding, childbirth is quite a painful experience for women. And so, this seems to imply that the judgment is for the entire female gender. But does this mean that the subsequent sentence about the woman’s desire being for her husband, and her husband ruling over her would necessitate such an extensive application to all members of the human race as well?   

Truth is, the reason this verse interest me is that it seems to make a general description of female psychology. I have read two commentaries on the verse which seems to make an explication of general female psychology.  Matthew Henry’s commentary writes “She is here put into a state of sorrow, one particular of which only is specified, that in bringing forth children; but it includes all those impressions of grief and fear which the mind of that tender sex is most apt to receive, and all the common calamities which they are liable to.” Ray Stedman says in a sermon of his “Her desires run after her husband. This is not primarily a reference to passion but to the hunger for approval. It is speaking of the fact that a woman finds her fullest sense of satisfaction in gaining her husband's approval. No other person can approach his approval in its significance to her. There can be no substitute for it. Others can be pleased and happy with her, but if he is not, she is distressed. He can be happy with her, and she doesn't care a fig what others think about her. Her desire thus finds its fulfillment in her husband -- she longs to be important to him.” I can’t begin to describe how uneasy I feel when I hear a male sermon speaker asserting his understanding of female psychology to a congregation that has female members in it. Who is he to profess to know what women want?

But isn’t desire for member of the opposite gender an innate characteristic of a person? After all, mutual attraction between opposite gender is required for the procreative interest of all species of the animal kingdom. So what then did God add to the equation when he pronounces that the woman’s desire will be for her husband? Wasn’t it already there?

Irvin A.Busenitz elaborates on the various views of what ‘desire’ means in his article “Woman’s Desire for Man: Genesis 3:16 Reconsidered”. “One prominent interpretation suggests that, as a punishment for the Fall, a woman's desire will be subject to her husband's."Her desire, whatever it may be, will not be her own. She cannot do what she wishes, for her husband rules over her like a despot and whatever she wishes is subject to his will. Another viewpoint contends that the woman will have an immense longing, yearning, and psychological dependence. More recently a third view has surfaced. It suggests that, based on the usage of "desire" in Gen 4:7, the woman will desire to dominate the relationship with her husband. The woman's desire is to control her husband (to usurp his divinely appointed headship), and he must master her, if he can.”

Irvin argues for the position that “The "desire factor" is not a part of the judgment but an explanation of

conditions and relationships as they will exist after the Fall. Even though the intimacy between the first man and his wife was abrogated, even though the unity with man would bring woman to the threshold

of death itself in the process of childbirth, yet woman would still possess a strong desire to be with

man. The broken intimacy and the pain in childbearing would not be allowed to nullify the yearning of

woman for man and the fulfillment of God's command to populate the earth or to alter the divine order of the headship of man.”

Ray Stedman’s view in his sermon I mentioned above seems to corroborate with the exegesis provided by Irvin, and he asserts that ‘this desire is not in itself a consequence of sin. This relationship of woman to man was present before the Fall as well.”

Irvin disputes the argument that desire here is about the woman’s desire to control her husband. “Woman may desire to dominate or rule over man, but it is not a part of the punishment pronounced up

on woman; it is just the essence, character, and result of all sin against God. Self-exaltation and pride

always result in the desire to dominate and rule. Every person to some extent desires to dominate and rule over others--not just woman over man.”

On the contrary, Ray Stedman asserts that this desire of a woman to control her husband is also a result of the judgment, but he makes this argument from the part of God’s judgment about the husband ruling over the woman - “It is the latter phrase of the sentence that marks the result of the Fall, "he shall rule over you." If, in imagination, we can put ourselves back with Adam and Eve before the Fall, in that blissful scene in the Garden of Eden, then we can see that the relationship of the woman to the man consisted of a natural desire to follow. She came out of man and was made for him, to be his helper and to work toward his goals. It was a natural yielding to which she opposed no resistance, but found herself delighting in the experience of following the man. But now as a result of the Fall, a perverse element enters into this. A struggle occurs, a tension ensues, in which the woman is torn between the natural God-given desire to yield to her husband, and at the same time, the awakened desire to exert her will against his, a perverse urge to rivalry or domination. This is what creates tension in women, as a result of the Fall.” In my opinion, I think it quite a stretch to infer this desire of the woman from the phrase “he will rule over you.”

As a roundup to this discussion on female psychology, I would say that I think that female psychology is as diverse and as complex as there are male psychologies. There are guys who like playing the submissive role in a relationship and are okay with girls taking a more dominant role and taking charge. I am sure there would be girls of such disposition suited for them. I have read that there are cultures with a matriarch hierarchy to marriage. In Japan and Korea, there is a tradition for the woman to handle the finance of the household. And I can vaguely recall watching a Chinese drama on Channel 8 where one of the characters mention a Chinese idiom about how a henpecked husband makes a good business person. I think contemporary societal culture is fine with different power relationships between genders. We have female bosses and leaders in society. I think women are capable people.

On another note, I get the understanding from reading such passages in the bible that Christianity supports the notion of a gender hierarchy in certain aspects of societal life, like in marriage or in church roles. I wonder what the girls in my church or in my varsity Christian fellowship think about this notion of gender hierarchy that seems to be the mainstream position of the church throughout history. I wouldn’t be surprised if they would argue for more egalitarian interpretation of texts in the bible regarding relationship between the genders.