July 10, 2009

2 comments:

  1. "She offered a caveat that the research on the impact of the two family communication patterns was conducted on the general population and so results could vary among evangelicals."


    This is a very important caveat here. I have maintained elsewhere that those who are without a specifically Biblical reason for holding "complementarian" styled views tend to arch towards extremes rather than understand properly the Biblical position of male headship. Thus, those who study this sort of thing often get a skewed view of Evangelical homes that practice Biblical Complementarianism.

    Thus, Colaner is right to "[call] for more research to consider the relationship between gender role ideology and family communication."

    But I would stress that this "ideology" needs to be researched in those who articulate a Biblical stance, not simply hold to a general religious ideology (since other religions, as well as some atheists tend to practice a "complementarian" style of family structure).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually, you misunderstood that line. She was not talking about differences between complementarians and egalitarians, but between conversation-oriented and conformity-oriented family communication patterns. Thus, she is not calling for research comparing evangelical complementarians with non-evangelical ones, but to look at evangelicals with the conversation-oriented family communication pattern versus evangelicals with the conformity-oriented one.

    ReplyDelete