Overcoming the Violence of “Virtuous” Womanhood: Liberating Women from the Proverbs 31 Paradigm

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Summary: The author is attempting to take a very popular Old Testament scripture (Proverbs 31) and problematize it for its misogynistic and white supremacist interpretation. This is a welcome discussion that many “modern” women are likely eager to hear. As such, I’m glad the author has chosen this scripture to analyze. The author rightly notes that Christian women are encouraged at young ages to become this proverbial woman in order to properly serve God, their husbands, their families, and their communities. But for the duration of this scripture, there is very little focus on the woman’s wellness and full humanity, as her main duty is to everyone else but herself. The author also rightly criticizes these norms, attempting to articulate why this portrayal is problematic and how it is misinterpreted. Lastly, the author uses the hermeneutic of suspicion and Walker’s definition of womanism to highlight how the wellness of women can be appropriately considered and centered instead of how it is portrayed in and promulgated by Proverbs 31.

However, there are some major revisions that I would suggest to strengthen this article and ready it for publication.

Suggested Revisions:

• The only time we really read about white supremacy, patriarchy, and misogyny directly are in the abstract. Most of the article explicitly talks about the theological problems this scripture runs into in contemporary application but we don’t get much in the way of scholarship discussing the white supremacy or patriarchal nature of biblical interpretation or of Christianity. It is imperative to incorporate that early in your article or to remove it from the abstract.

• Give examples of Proverbs 31 being used to propagate white supremacy, patriarchy, and misogynoir. Especially in your experience as a preacher, this would be helpful.

• The last three paragraphs on page 4 which start with “First,” “Second,” and “Third,” are great and we need to get to those more quickly. I think you can cut at least 4 paragraphs or combine some and take out the redundant information in the previous pages. One of the things you can cut could be the earlier references to Lady Wisdom and the Strange Woman because without a fuller explanation, you are assuming your reader knows this information and are potentially confusing them if they do not know this information already. I think you can also cut the section about your time in seminary. I would suffice that section to say, “in seminary, I was introduced to womanism and womanist theology,” which is the lens/hermeneutic and/or methodology that you are using to build your argument against the contemporary use of this particular scripture.

• I am not a linguistic scholar but I would be consistent in how you introduce the different translations that you offer throughout the article. When you introduce “ʾēšet-ḥayîl”, the reader is left to assume that you mean “noble woman” because it’s used in the previous sentence but a couple paragraphs later you discuss the translation to mean “virtuous woman”. I think for clarity, I would make the connection between “noble woman” and “ʾēšet-ḥayîl” so that as you build on and establish other translations, it makes more sense.

• When you get to the critique of Lady Wisdom, this needs to be a separate section or perhaps included in the following section where you further discuss the two characters in the story. That is what you tell us you will do in the beginning of the article and so it would be helpful to follow through with that. I would move the “The problem with making Wisdom the standard-bearer…” and on to the next section or move to the analysis/discussion section of your article. Generally, I would keep your literature review separate from your analysis so that the structure of the article is more organized.

• In the section about Wisdom and the Strange Woman, you have already told us what Proverbs was meant to do in the previous section so I would add in a phrase like “Because Proverbs is a book of instructions…” instead of writing it as if you are introducing it to your reader for the first time.

• With the exception of your personal exposure to Proverbs 31 and its use in your childhood church, I find there are some sections of the text that are more conjecture than literature review. As such, we need more evidence. This doesn’t have to come from a particular scholarly source but I think it’s important to have some appropriate backing to what you’re saying. For example, in the section where you discuss the disparity between men’s sexual freedom and women’s sexual freedom/autonomy, you give us the adage likened to “boys will be boys”.

• Further you say in the following paragraph, “other women have tried to attain this ideal.” You’re not wrong but give us some examples or evidence to support your argument. Radical subjectivity of womanism speaks to ownership over one’s own experience, not broad-stroking the experience of the entire group, particularly without any evidentiary support.

• When discussing hermeneutics of suspicion, I would also reference Kelly Brown Douglas’ scholarship on this: I believe it’s in her chapter, “Marginalized People, Liberating Perspectives” which is a few chapters after Clarice Martin’s chapter in Mitzi Smith’s I Found God in Me.

• In your conclusion, I would change “in my opinion” to “based on the above evidence” or “based on the above argument, I say a resounding no”. Again, your interest in this topic is personal and it is appropriate to name it as such but you spend a great deal of time articulating how others support your critique and your argument, it is important to keep that in the forefront.

Author Response

Please see the attachment with track changes to the original manuscript.

Point 1. The only time we really read about white supremacy, patriarchy, and misogyny directly are in the abstract. Most of the article explicitly talks about the theological problems this scripture runs into in contemporary application but we don’t get much in the way of scholarship discussing the white supremacy or patriarchal nature of biblical interpretation or of Christianity. It is imperative to incorporate that early in your article or to remove it from the abstract.

Response 1: White Supremacy, patriarchy, and misogyny are directly mentioned and addressed in the sections, "Proverbs 31 and the Concept of Virtue," "Patriarchy, the Church, and the Problems with Virtue as a Standard for Women,""Woman Wisdom and the Strange Woman in Proverbs," and "Hermeneutics of Suspicion, Liberation, and An Ethic of Incarnation." 

Point 2. Give examples of Proverbs 31 being used to propagate white supremacy, patriarchy, and misogynoir. Especially in your experience as a preacher, this would be helpful.

Response 2. Extensive citations have been added to the manuscript to address this.

Point 3. The last three paragraphs on page 4 which start with “First,” “Second,” and “Third,” are great and we need to get to those more quickly. I think you can cut at least 4 paragraphs or combine some and take out the redundant information in the previous pages. One of the things you can cut could be the earlier references to Lady Wisdom and the Strange Woman because without a fuller explanation, you are assuming your reader knows this information and are potentially confusing them if they do not know this information already. I think you can also cut the section about your time in seminary. I would suffice that section to say, “in seminary, I was introduced to womanism and womanist theology,” which is the lens/hermeneutic and/or methodology that you are using to build your argument against the contemporary use of this particular scripture.

Response 3. I have removed quite a bit of text in order to get to the paragraphs on page 4 quicker. I have reworked the section which began, "in seminary..."

Point 4. I am not a linguistic scholar but I would be consistent in how you introduce the different translations that you offer throughout the article. When you introduce “ʾēšet-ḥayîl”, the reader is left to assume that you mean “noble woman” because it’s used in the previous sentence but a couple paragraphs later you discuss the translation to mean “virtuous woman”. I think for clarity, I would make the connection between “noble woman” and “ʾēšet-ḥayîl” so that as you build on and establish other translations, it makes more sense.

Response 4. I added information from Suzanne McCarthy's book, Valiant or Virtuous: Gender Bias in Bible Translation, to make the section clearer. 

Point 5. When you get to the critique of Lady Wisdom, this needs to be a separate section or perhaps included in the following section where you further discuss the two characters in the story. That is what you tell us you will do in the beginning of the article and so it would be helpful to follow through with that. I would move the “The problem with making Wisdom the standard-bearer…” and on to the next section or move to the analysis/discussion section of your article. Generally, I would keep your literature review separate from your analysis so that the structure of the article is more organized.

Response 5. I made this a new section, entitled, "Patriarchy, The Church, and the Problems with Virtue as a Standard for Women."

Point 6. In the section about Wisdom and the Strange Woman, you have already told us what Proverbs was meant to do in the previous section so I would add in a phrase like “Because Proverbs is a book of instructions…” instead of writing it as if you are introducing it to your reader for the first time.

Response 6. I have reworked the sentence about Proverbs.

Point 7. With the exception of your personal exposure to Proverbs 31 and its use in your childhood church, I find there are some sections of the text that are more conjecture than literature review. As such, we need more evidence. This doesn’t have to come from a particular scholarly source but I think it’s important to have some appropriate backing to what you’re saying. For example, in the section where you discuss the disparity between men’s sexual freedom and women’s sexual freedom/autonomy, you give us the adage likened to “boys will be boys”.

Response 7. I have added extensive citations to support my claims.

Point 8. Further you say in the following paragraph, “other women have tried to attain this ideal.” You’re not wrong but give us some examples or evidence to support your argument. Radical subjectivity of womanism speaks to ownership over one’s own experience, not broad-stroking the experience of the entire group, particularly without any evidentiary support.

Response 8. Again, I have added citations to support my statements.

Point 9. When discussing hermeneutics of suspicion, I would also reference Kelly Brown Douglas’ scholarship on this: I believe it’s in her chapter, “Marginalized People, Liberating Perspectives” which is a few chapters after Clarice Martin’s chapter in Mitzi Smith’s I Found God in Me.

Response 9. Reference from Brown Douglas' chapter added.

Point 10. In your conclusion, I would change “in my opinion” to “based on the above evidence” or “based on the above argument, I say a resounding no”. Again, your interest in this topic is personal and it is appropriate to name it as such but you spend a great deal of time articulating how others support your critique and your argument, it is important to keep that in the forefront.

Response 10. Change made

Reviewer 2 Report

I think this essay offers a much-needed Womanist analysis on a very problematic text.  The author does a great job explaining why its use is harmful to women and girls and offers alternative readings.

However, more support is needed for some of the claims:

- line 333 references "countless sermons, bible studies, articles, and books."  Can the author cite some of these from popular preachers or influential ministries?

- lines 371 - 378 argue that women are discouraged from demonstrating Woman Wisdom's attributes. These claims (especially the one about intimidated husbands) will be more credible backed by citations and references, even instances of this from pop culture or popular narratives.

-lines 413-418 need support.  Scholarship on rape culture could support these claims.

-lines 423-447 also need support.  I do not doubt that this occurs and that the author has witnessed it, but without appeals to credible sources, we cannot know if the generalizations hold.

- lines 572-573 need a citation.

- lines 729-731 could be strengthened by an appeal to black feminist writings or Emilie Townes' Womanist Ethics and the Cultural Production of Evil

The section on Shifting the Paradigm needs some editing.  Lines 607-608 suggest that the following sections will "determine [Proverbs 31's] efficacy and usefulness in the lives of 21st century women."  But the sections below do not do that.  Deconstruction and critique are evident, but there isn't a sense that Prov 31 offers anything efficacious or useful to a 21st century woman.  Instead, the essay offers of four tenets of Womanism as useful tools to the Proverbs 31 woman.

That said, the essay does offer original insights and offers a sound contribution to Womanist discourse.   The section on "Is-ness" and Spirituality is especially compelling. The concerns I've said above are predominantly stylistic issues that if addressed, would allow the content to stand more firmly.

I appreciated the overall tone of the article - that it was not only informed scholarship, but that it was scholarship informed by personal experience and written in accessible language without jargon.  I do think that in some places, colloquial language became a distraction that could confuse some readers, but could be modified to keep the same idea:

- lines 33-34: "period" could be "at all."

- line 136: "floored" could be shocked, dismayed, stunned, etc.

- line 230: "It causes my head to swim" could be "I am [overwhelmed, overcome, etc.]"

- line 364: "may have been a given" could be "may have been [common, accepted, etc.]

In line 130, the word "normal" is vague.  Adding a descriptor of the behavior that should be normalized (like practices of self-care mentioned in the paragraph) would strengthen the sentence.

In a few places, wordy phrases or those using passive voice can be modified to be more direct and succinct:

- line 113: "the text has found its way into contemporary society" is worded passively, suggesting that it just happened in some haphazard way.  The rest of the essay emphasizes the text's use by real communities, so if the author would find it distracting to say something here about how the text was transmitted into contemporary society, the sentence could be reworded to say "However, the text is actively used as an instructional and formational text for girls and women in contemporary society."

-line 245: "does not necessarily equate" is less decisive that "does not equate"; the rest of the paragraph offers no equivocation, so why is it needed in this sentence?

- line 280: "brought over" could be "brought"; "would have made" could be "made"

- line 399: be more specific or descriptive with "in a particular way with a particular religious bent"

- line 644: "Boys and men are always allowed and even encouraged to be rowdy..." is overstated and can be modified to "Boys and men are encouraged..." (I can think of many places like church, school, and some fancy outings, where boys are discouraged from being rowdy.)

The author(s) shift between "we" and "I." Use of "we" in lines 166, 173, 178, 187, and 193 is inconsistent with the singular pronouns used in most of the essay, even in the surrounding paragraphs (lines 155, 161, 162, 182, 190, and 196.)

Be consistent with titles. In one paragraph, the author uses titles that are not adopted in the rest of the essay for other scholars with these titles.  I suggest omitting "Dr." in line 710 and "Professor" in line 713.

Author Response

Please see attached manuscript with track changes.

Point 1. 

However, more support is needed for some of the claims:

- line 333 references "countless sermons, bible studies, articles, and books."  Can the author cite some of these from popular preachers or influential ministries?

- lines 371 - 378 argue that women are discouraged from demonstrating Woman Wisdom's attributes. These claims (especially the one about intimidated husbands) will be more credible backed by citations and references, even instances of this from pop culture or popular narratives.

-lines 413-418 need support.  Scholarship on rape culture could support these claims.

-lines 423-447 also need support.  I do not doubt that this occurs and that the author has witnessed it, but without appeals to credible sources, we cannot know if the generalizations hold.

• lines 572-573 need a citation.

Response 1. Extensive references and citations added throughout the manuscript to support these statements.

Point 2. The section on Shifting the Paradigm needs some editing.  Lines 607-608 suggest that the following sections will "determine [Proverbs 31's] efficacy and usefulness in the lives of 21st century women."  But the sections below do not do that.  Deconstruction and critique are evident, but there isn't a sense that Prov 31 offers anything efficacious or useful to a 21st century woman.  Instead, the essay offers of four tenets of Womanism as useful tools to the Proverbs 31 woman.

Response 2. Introduction to this section has been reworked to address this issue.

Point 3.

I do think that in some places, colloquial language became a distraction that could confuse some readers, but could be modified to keep the same idea:

- lines 33-34: "period" could be "at all."

- line 136: "floored" could be shocked, dismayed, stunned, etc.

- line 230: "It causes my head to swim" could be "I am [overwhelmed, overcome, etc.]"

• line 364: "may have been a given" could be "may have been [common, accepted, etc.]

Response 3. Language changed in each of these places to address the issue.

Point 4. In line 130, the word "normal" is vague.  Adding a descriptor of the behavior that should be normalized (like practices of self-care mentioned in the paragraph) would strengthen the sentence.

Response 4. Lines 124-130 deleted following, "How terribly unhealthy and unrealistic is all of this?"

 Point 5. 

In a few places, wordy phrases or those using passive voice can be modified to be more direct and succinct:

- line 113: "the text has found its way into contemporary society" is worded passively, suggesting that it just happened in some haphazard way.  The rest of the essay emphasizes the text's use by real communities, so if the author would find it distracting to say something here about how the text was transmitted into contemporary society, the sentence could be reworded to say "However, the text is actively used as an instructional and formational text for girls and women in contemporary society."

-line 245: "does not necessarily equate" is less decisive that "does not equate"; the rest of the paragraph offers no equivocation, so why is it needed in this sentence?

- line 280: "brought over" could be "brought"; "would have made" could be "made"

- line 399: be more specific or descriptive with "in a particular way with a particular religious bent"

• line 644: "Boys and men are always allowed and even encouraged to be rowdy..." is overstated and can be modified to "Boys and men are encouraged..." (I can think of many places like church, school, and some fancy outings, where boys are discouraged from being rowdy.)

Response 5. Each of these statements was changed to reflect the suggested wording.

Point 6. The author(s) shift between "we" and "I." Use of "we" in lines 166, 173, 178, 187, and 193 is inconsistent with the singular pronouns used in most of the essay, even in the surrounding paragraphs (lines 155, 161, 162, 182, 190, and 196.)

Response 6. Pronoun changed in each line.

Point 7. Be consistent with titles. In one paragraph, the author uses titles that are not adopted in the rest of the essay for other scholars with these titles.  I suggest omitting "Dr." in line 710 and "Professor" in line 713.

Response 7. Titles deleted

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an excellent article, on an extremely important topic, and I highly recommend it for publication. The emphasis on women's need to exercise "redemptive self-love" (84) is especially key. The goal of the article, to dismantle oppressive interpretations of Proverbs 31, is admirable, and this goal needs articulation earlier, perhaps in the very first paragraph. The distinction between oppressive hermeneutical or interpretive strategies and the actual scripture itself also needs more clarification earlier on in the article. In fact, the entire section titled "Shifting the Paradigm" (lines 602–608) could function as the second half of the article's introductory paragraph, in order to give the argument more focus from its beginning. The key is to show your readers you are not attempting to discard Proverbs 31 entirely but to examine this piece of scripture from a womanist hermeneutical perspective, more empowering to women of colour (and all women). The point about the woman being a sort of figurative, metaphorical personification, poetically representing an aspirational ideal, also needs to appear in the very first, introductory paragraph. This is key to your argument that the problem is misogynist misinterpretation of Proverbs 31 more than the scripture itself.        

There are a few resources not mentioned which could be included. Consider referencing Nyasha Junior's work on womanist biblical interpretation. The monograph Valiant of Virtuous: Gender Bias in Bible Translation by Suzanne McCarthy is also quite relevant to the discussion of the intellectual history of "virtue". The book Rest is Resistance: A Manifesto by Tricia Hersey, founder of the Nap Ministry, also came to my mind while reading this article, especially due to its dialogue with contemporary womanist movements. 

One final request: when the readers are urged to check more helpful "textual commentaries" (457) it would be great to provide a footnote with a list of the best commentaries applicable to Proverbs 31 which would support a womanist interpretation of the Hebrew scripture. This will point your readers, especially younger scholars, in fruitful directions and help generate future womanist research and publication arising from this excellent article.     

There are just a couple grammatically awkward spots in this article. At line 117, the phrase "and preached to" should be removed or rephrased. (Perhaps there needs to be a separate sentence here referencing preaching). Similarly, at lines 403 to 404, the phrase "is preached and taught about" could be: 'is discussed in preaching and teaching" to avoid the faulty parallelism created by the preposition "about". The quotation that runs from 494–499 contains some typos. For example the word "kins" should be "kinds"; and the phrase "defies normative wholeness" seems out of place. Please check this quotation carefully with the original source. 

Author Response

Please see the attached revised manuscript with track changes.

Point 1. The goal of the article, to dismantle oppressive interpretations of Proverbs 31, is admirable, and this goal needs articulation earlier, perhaps in the very first paragraph. In fact, the entire section titled "Shifting the Paradigm" (lines 602–608) could function as the second half of the article's introductory paragraph, in order to give the argument more focus from its beginning. The key is to show your readers you are not attempting to discard Proverbs 31 entirely but to examine this piece of scripture from a womanist hermeneutical perspective, more empowering to women of colour (and all women). 

Response 1. I inserted a sentence at the end of the first paragraph addressing this goal, as well as a direct reference to a shift in the paradigm based on Womanist tenets in the article's introduction to address this perspective.

Point 2. There are a few resources not mentioned which could be included. Consider referencing Nyasha Junior's work on womanist biblical interpretation. The monograph Valiant of Virtuous: Gender Bias in Bible Translation by Suzanne McCarthy is also quite relevant to the discussion of the intellectual history of "virtue".

Response 2. Reference from McCarthy inserted in section, "Proverbs 31 and the Concept of Virtue."

Point 3. One final request: when the readers are urged to check more helpful "textual commentaries" (457) it would be great to provide a footnote with a list of the best commentaries applicable to Proverbs 31 which would support a womanist interpretation of the Hebrew scripture. This will point your readers, especially younger scholars, in fruitful directions and help generate future womanist research and publication arising from this excellent article.     

Response 3. Footnote referencing commentaries added at 457.

Point 4. There are just a couple grammatically awkward spots in this article. At line 117, the phrase "and preached to" should be removed or rephrased. (Perhaps there needs to be a separate sentence here referencing preaching). Similarly, at lines 403 to 404, the phrase "is preached and taught about" could be: 'is discussed in preaching and teaching" to avoid the faulty parallelism created by the preposition "about". The quotation that runs from 494–499 contains some typos. For example the word "kins" should be "kinds"; and the phrase "defies normative wholeness" seems out of place. Please check this quotation carefully with the original source. 

Response 4. Phrases reworked to reflect suggested wording. Also, quotation checked and corrected.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Great job making the revisions. I recommend for publication.

Author Response

Thank you so much.