first off I am totally opposed to ordaining women for several reasons. all practical. now, it also says elsewhere in the NT that the believer is to grow up into his head, Christ, be more like Him. both sexes have one model, a male, Jesus Christ. The order of creation theory, that man being made first before woman is closer to God, would have rocks plants, birds fishes creeping things various animals as closer to God than man is. Thios is perilously near to the deep ecology notion, so obviously this idea of man made first and woman made from him is therefore the head is not an absolute analogy but conditional else you risk heresy if pushed too far. (especially if you add the filioque run wild as per St. Photios the Great.)
If the believer is to grow up into the Head Who is Christ, then if man is head of woman she is to grow up into man, be more like him, he is her model. she should strive to be competent in the same ways man is.
The analogy to Christ as head however, has also to be conditional not absolute, because although He is 100% human He is also 100% divine, and the divine has no continuity of being or essence with the creature, while woman has continuity of human nature essence with the man.
Feminism of the third wave sort probably derived from "difference feminism" or pseudo feminism as I called it when it first appeared, is totally different. First there is generally a conflict of opposites implied or explicit in the ideas of masculinity and femininity, and frankly this has gone on all along anyway, but in a socially non destabilizing format. the occult philosophies invariably posit such Hegelian opposition butr without resolution in a synthesis. but some especially gnostic and third wave and "androgyny" do posit a synthesis, of continually inadequate women and soy boy emasculated men with the women ramped up enough to go to the gym, be inpolitics, public speaking, etc. all things considered unfeminine, unnatural, etc. by opponents of women suffrage even of women speaking or voting in organizatins that had both sexes in them in the 1800s.
Androgyny posits the same dialectic of opposition (complementary and so forth being a cover for this and a means of denial of women their birthright of development like a boy is encouraged to develop more pain resistant courageous, not phony, etc. stride freely and so forth) and instead of saying there is something wrong with the sexist ideas, exalts it and then says to combine the "energies" of the sexes, instead of sorting out what's wrong in the sense of evil or wrong in the sense of inadequate and get rid of that and stop trying to be radically different and play all kinds of sick games.
The entire feminism mess of today, having some of its roots in problematic notions that were a minor feature in the 1800s and even in second wave feminism, which was then swamped by Marxism, is FAKE FEMINSIM. it is full blown difference feminism which claimed to have women be managers executives etc. without losing their "femininity" and no talk much of blue collar type jobs and marry for money as well as looks when you get down to it, it became a predatory version of the standard traditional man as provider woman as dependent therefore dominatable especially because of the personality encouraged in her, and is now armed with laws in case of divorce that MGTOW developed in reaction to. MGTOW assumes also all women are by EVOLUTION (heavy materialistic Ayn Randian and evolutionary notions inform this) to be predatory, disloyal, etc. etc. and monkey branch man to man and do hypergamy or dump a man for a "better" man i.e., better money and looks, and are incapable of love or truth or integrtity while men are inherently loving and truthful and have integrity. it almost reads like a reverse of Victorian balderdash about sacred womanhood and its virtues vs. low life man which must be raised to civilization and decency by Woman (capitalized) a notion partly exploited by the women's suffrage movement, true. MGTOW posits that woman's inherent evil nature is held in check by patriarchal systems and some advocate taking away woman's vote and look longingly at the moslem control of men over women.
a modified Christian version posits similar, almost blasphemously implying God made women that way, and designed an order of rule that contains and limits the evil potential if obeyed. like containment theory regarding communism.
Meanwhile, whether Christian or not, the male ego titillating and pandering manipulation esteemed is mere sin of pride and vain glory and the femininity that does this mere deceptive and somewhat vainglory and ambition insofar as she gets a "good provider" she can brag about and look down on stupider women who married lower, and can push him gently to become a high status male (more so than he is already since 80 % of women are competing in MGTOW social theory for 20% of men) so she is high status by being married to him. This is all evil.
