Analysis Of Every Two Minutes, By Susan Thistlethwaite

Thistlethwaite writes on how the Bible may be interpreted by a dominating patriarchal view, where men use the Bible as a source to account for the abuse given to these different women. Yet, she also mentions how there is also a feminist biblical interpretation, interpretations that allow these battered women to see a different side of the Bible, to be interpreted in a way that favors them, that defends them and claims how important they are to God. The main thesis in Susan Thistlethwaite’s essay of Every Two Minutes; Battered Women and Feminist Interpretation is pointing out the problem of husband against wife violence in Christian families based on a misogynistic interpretation of the Bible. She points to this misogynistic interpretation

to ultimately offer a more feminist biblical interpretation which sympathizes with the abusive situation of these women. Thistlethwaite makes her arguments by referring to different Biblical verses and viewing them through this new lens. Her new feminist interpretation contrasts with the previous interpretation in that it promotes self-worth and importance towards God, reversing the objectification of these battered women.

Thistlethwaite begins her essay by mentioning how “women’s experience in Western culture has been shaped by the biblical materials, and the biblical materials were shaped by a patriarchal culture” (p. 97). Thus, the interpretation of the Bible was favored in a way that allowed men to not only justify their actions, but also shape the view of society, specifically women.  Thus, through this quote, Thistlethwaite is demonstrating how influential different INTERPRETATIONS of the Bible are. She is also demonstrating that the way these biblical TEXTS were interpreted were dominant enough to change the view of these battered women and make them begin to believe that these violent action performed by Christian men was acceptable (p 99). She is wanting to show that there is this specific way to interpret the Bible, but that only favors the action of these Christian men who batter their wives. She continues to write how “I

received calls from some women who were experiencing abuse but were reluctant to try to change their situation because they had been told the teaching of the Bible prohibited their protest” (p. 97). Yet one is reluctant to question who was the person behind this message? Was it a male figure? Was it the husband who abused their wife and used the Bible to add to their authority while limiting the power of women? These women may have wanted to turn to the Bible but were not allowed to. They may have wanted to change their life circumstances, but were prohibited FROM DOING SO and thus they were stuck in this repetitive cycle of abuse (p. 97). The men used the Bible as a mechanism to repress these women they battered. They interpreted the Bible in a way that justified their violent actions.  Thistlethwaite gives an example OF HOW the views of these battered women were shaped by this patriarchal interpretation as she discusses an encounter with a women who had experienced this abuse but justified it by referring to Genesis 3:16 in the Bible, mentioning how “women are inferior in status before husband and God and deserving of a life of pain….God punished women more” (p. 99).
The way Thistlewaite is making her case is through different biblical verses such as the one stated above. Most of these interpretations took place is by the fact that these women were taught these interpretations, and it may be inferred that they were taught by these Christian men (p 99). Thus, it may not have been the case where these battered women would pick up a Bible and interpret these verses this way, but there was a secondary figure that made this interpretation for them and were teaching it to them(p. 99). She also quotes how these women “believed what they had been taught, that resistance to this injustice is unbiblical and unchristian” (p. 99) She mentions how the more religious these women were, the more imprinted they had this patriarchal view and accepted them (p. 99). These Biblical views and impacts were so powerful, that many of those who were willing to help these battered women “view religious beliefs….as an obstacle to a women’s successful handling abuse” (p. 99). Thus, the Bible is not seen as a form of salvation towards their situation but rather as a burden, an object of literature that condemns their situation. Both these quotes show how degrading women were interpreted to be, but yet because it was in the Bible, it was justified (p. 99). Yet, it also displays how naive yet innocent these women were as well as the important role that their culture played, as it taught them to think and interpret the Bible in such a way that at times it was hard for them to think for themselves upon a different interpretation.
Yet, Thistlethwaite also mentions how the same Bible that was used to justify the violence of these Christian men by presenting a patriarchal view can also be interpreted through a different perspective, such as a feminist interpretation. It is through this interpretation of the Bible that women may begin to change the patriarchal interpretation in a new way that empathizes and acknowledges their sufferings (p. 97). Thistlethwaite writes “we begin to develop a feminist interpretation because the Bible is part of the fabric of the oppression of battered women.” (p. 97)Thus, this new interpretation of the Bible is aware of the suffering of these battered women and plays a big and new role in how these women see themselves (p. 98). Thus, in a way, Thistlethwaite is providing an outlet where these abused women can use the Bible in a manner that they can relate to and connect to in a personal level, just as it was for the Christian men regarding their androcentric interpretation. Thistlethwaite also points out that the Bible cannot only be interpreted in one practical way, but instead may be interpreted in multiple different ways (p. 98). She also mentions the importance of both the historical and social context when it came to interpreting the Bible (p. 98). Similarly, she demonstrates how the feminist interpretation of the Bible is built off from the patriarchal view: “the patriarchal view that formed part of the formation of the text is in turn supporting and supported by the text.” (p. 98) .Thus, she acknowledges that one must not view the patriarchal interpretation of the bible as separate, but instead, women must use it to build their own feminist interpretation (p. 98).The history of the past interpretations of the Bible are not forgotten, but instead [YOU JUST SAID BUT INSTEAD, SAY YET OR BUT RATHER added to, built off one another and based off previous interpretations (p. 98). It is through history that perspectives have been shaped and adapted.
Thistlethwaite is having these women read the Bible differently, in a new light, a light that favors, defends and sympathizes with these women and the circumstances that they are in. She also indicates how “the striking amount of biblical material that recounts Jesus’ special regard for women despite androcentric reaction, was the beginning point for the development of a feminist interpretation of the Bible” (p. 101).Thistlethwaite is having them to do that because she wants these women to not only see one interpretation of the Bible, but also a new interpretation that can change both their self-worth and life circumstances in a positive manner. The way she does this is by drawing to a particular text or verse in the Bible, often in a particular setting where the women are apart from the men, such as in a counseling center. She is having these read for themselves these new interpretation, allowing them to see things that they may not have seen before (p100). She is ultimately trying to empower them to read the Bible through a new lens. She mentions how “these women can learn that the scriptures are much more on their side than they dared hoped” and how the main message for these women is “ you have a right both to your religious beliefs and to your self -esteem” (p 100)  In a way it is important that Thistlethwaite addresses this quote because by stating that women have this “right”, this quote is acknowledging their freedom to think/interpret as they please, regardless of the fact that they are women, something that they could not do before through a patriarchal interpretation of the Bible. In a way, her main goal is that she is trying to demonstrate through to these battered women how a new interpretation can offer them a sense of freedom and hope.
As her essay develops, Thistlethwaite approaches several biblical texts and verses to support her claim. For example, she mentions how “the Bible is written from the perspective of the powerless” and that “ those who are oppressed by societal structures are especially dear to God” (p. 100),Thus, the reason to why she may mention this is because these battered women may be able to interpret the Bible on a more personal level, since they too may feel powerless when controlled and abused by  male figures. If these battered women see themselves as inferior to their husbands and undignified because of the way their husbands treat them, then they can in a way feel closer to God and may begin to see themselves in a more positive manner, the way God sees them (p100 ) . Thistlethwaite further gives more evidence towards her claim by citing verses of ISAM 2:1-10, explicitly saying that God is on their side (p 100). She also cites verses of Luke, John and Mark providing an interpretation that makes them feel valued and that God has sympathized with their situation of abuse (p 101). Thistlethwaite also gives an example of John 7:53-8:11 where God is protecting women (p101). It is through all of these references to the Bible that Thistlethwaite, as mentioned before, is trying to get these women to see that there is a new interpretation that is developing and how it can shape their lives drastically for the better. Thus, what Thistlethwaite may be trying to do is to allow these battered women to begin to see themselves in a new light, allowing them to develop a difference and better sense of self-worth.
Similarly, Thistlethwaite further demonstrates the point that Thistlethwaite is trying to come across, how women interpreting the text this way , will be able to shape their personal life experiences (p102) also mentions the fact that “ the opinion of women that prevailing androcentric interpretation of the Bible is wrong, coupled with the emphasis in a major portion of the biblical materials themselves on God’s identification with the oppressed, creates critical interpretation.

(p.102) ’” and that “women can begin to examine and reinterpret these texts, imagining new relationships between the texts and their experience ”( p 102). Thus, they may no longer tolerate the abusiveness of these Christian men and begin to shape their lives in a new direction. Thistlethwaite provides evidence for this claim by citing Luke 9:1-5, a Bible verse which may be directly referring to their new personal life circumstance as it mentions that “ and wherever they do not receive you, when you leave [there] shake of the dust from your feet as a testimony against them” (p 102), ultimately encouraging these Christian battered women to leave their abusive relationship. Thistlethwaite is not only asking them to view this new perspective, but also she may be asking them to change their situation for the

better.
Thistlethwaite, MENTIONS that even though they are these different PROBLEMS seen in the Bible, the way each of these genders tend to interpret the Bible IN their own perspective, ALLOWS them to not only shape their different views but also their lives and the lives of others. THE reason as to why there are these different perspectives of the Bible in the first place,  is because she is elevating and introducing these battered women to Biblical text that were foreign to them BEFORE THE TEXT that they had not interacted with, formed a sincere and personal relationship with. NO ENTIENDO ESTE ULTIMO SENTENCE???Ultimately, throughout her whole essay, the evidence that Thistlewaithe gives is good enough to support her claim. The reason for this is because she gives both personal as well as textual evidence, mostly from the Bible, to support her claim. Thus, Thistlethwaite allows the reader to interpret that the women may not want to be viewed as inferior to men, but because all of these different biblical passages refer to the women as being inferior and how certain patriarchal actions are ok, these women in a way only know or understand this one point view, which is why they might tend to succumb to the actions of their husbands. In conclusion, in her essay of Every Two Minutes; Battered Women and Feminist Interpretation  both demonstrates two very different sides of the Bible, and how each side influences the lives of women in a both negative and positive manner. I think that this essay is very effective. I believe that Thistlethwaite points out both sides of interpreting the Bible in a way that allows the reader to understand how each interpretation affects women emotionally, mentally, and in different aspects of their personal life. I think that Thistlethwaite gives a good amount of evidence as she states several examples of her personal experience with interacting with these battered women and their experiences with the bible.

Maybe in conclkusion put first in the oaragrapgh