In general, when I see otherwise intelligent people declare themselves christians I just could not understand if not with the child-indoctrinating and cognitive dissonance thing. However, it is more strange when the person in question is from a few particular groups. Today I would like to focus on the "womens" group, about half the world population, and I am going to focus only in the "serve the man" thing included in the bible, from old to new testament, and then in Judaism and Islam too. Today I am not going to even bother about the poligamy, rape and those other Christian pearls. And to the people saying those are frowned upon in the Bible I ask them to come back when I adress that topic. To the ones saying "that were different times" I say as always, that Ill stop relating it to your alleged beliefs the day bibles don't include those bits.
But on for today's topic.
Probably the first hint is this:
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Genesis 3:16
By the way, that's part of women's punishment due to original sin.
Of course, the Old Testament is always a bit old, when considering gender equality (or race equality, or a lot of other equalities, to that matter), so maybe we should point to a few New Testament bits - the kindest half of Bible -
The Pauline epistles are thirteen New Testament books attributed to Paul, the apostle. That is, one of the persons that, as Christians, you should believe received Christ's teachings as directly as possible.
In particular, the first letter to the Corinthians includes this nice bit:
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 1 Corinthians 11:3
This is a couple lines after saying that, since he (Paul) was follower of Christ, you should be followers of Paul, but back to topic, this is quite mild, right? It's not as hard as in Genesis and ruling, is it? In his letter to the Ephesians, he elaborates and generalizes the "Christ head of man, man head of women" thing
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Ephesians 5:22-24
Now here is present the Genesis' idea of wife serve husband, submissive and all. And just to avoid giving the impression it's a temporal rant, he says again:
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. Colossians 3:18
As we'll see below, Paul has a nice record of gender in-equality fighting, but then again, he only was one of the twelve favorites of Christ, but not the favorite, as Peter was. Speaking of which...
Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 1 Peter 3:1
So, Peter's too. Now that it's being shown this is a bit of a general feeling in bible, I would like to point to why there's not too many women preaching and why, Bible in hand, there shouldn't be any:
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 1 Corinthians 34-35
That's it, women are not allowed to even speak in church, and they can only learn - about religion, I guess - from their own husbands, not any man. I've seen this bit downplayed, interpreting that Paul wasn't saying this himself, but quoting a previous letter from the Corinthians, but then he wrote this to Timothy:
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 1 Timothy 2:11-14
In the first two verses, he just repeats that women must learn in silence and servitude, and that a woman shouldn't teach or command a man. By itself, it could be outrageous, but that's why I copied the other two verses, in which the "logic" behind the silence command is based: Adam was first, Eve was after him. That kind of "reasoning" makes this bit laughable, doesn't it? And, by the way, the author blames the whole original sin in Eve. He don't think Adam should have gone Where that fruit came from? The Forbidden Tree? And you expect me to eat too?
Not to be able to learn anything but from men should be hard, that's why I guessed he was speaking only about religion. It seems I understood correctly, because in the letter to Titus he allows women to teach. Not over a man, of course - that would be having authority over him - but they can teach younger women:
The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed. Titus 2:3-5
As I said before, I guess it requires a lot of simple-mindedness to start believing this things and resistance to learning to keep believing them, for any person, but when considering women? I don't understand how can a woman declare herself a Christian, considering these few Bible bits, declare that she is equal to other persons, and still don't get the incoherence of that thought.
So, women, I hope you see you shouldn't claim to be Christian.
Unless you like to be considered servants, of course.