The Woman’s Desire

Introduction

In Gen 3:16 the woman is told,

“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (ESV).

The word for ‘pain’ relates to physical pain as well as to emotional sorrow.^[1]  It also refers to the pain of toil, i.e., labour that is strenuous and requires the expenditure of considerable energy.^[2]   The second phrase ‘In pain you shall bring forth children’ uses a cognate word and the intended meaning is similar, serving to reinforce the first phrase.  The process of bearing and rearing children was going to be painful, labourious and difficult – for the woman in particular.

The interpretation of the second half of the verse, in particular the woman’s desire, has in recent times become the subject of some controversy.  In this article we will examine what the nature of the woman’s desire is.

Current Interpretations

The word translated as ‘desire’ occurs only three times in the Old Testament – in Gen 3:16; 4:7 and Song 7:10 – and means simply ‘urge, longing, i.e., a very strong emotion or feeling to have or do something’.^[3]

Traditionally, the woman’s desire in Gen 3:16 has been interpreted in one of two ways.  Many have understood this to refer to the woman’s yearning or need for the man in some way – such as sexual desire, or a desire for protection.  Alternatively, the phrase has been translated as per the KJV margin, “Thy desire shall be [subject] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee”, indicating that the woman would no longer be able to act upon her desires autonomously.

In 1975, a new interpretation was put forward by Susan Foh, whose re-examination of Gen 3:16 was, in her own words, ‘prompted by the current issue of feminism in the church’⁴.[4]  Foh’s theory was that the woman’s desire towards her husband was a hostile one – a desire to master and dominate him.  Based on a comparison with sin’s desire to control Cain in Gen 4:7, Foh rendered Gen 3:16b as “Your desire to control shall be to your husband; but he should master you”.  As Foh explained, “Her desire is to contend with him for leadership in their relationship … and so the man must actively seek to rule his wife.”[5]⁵

Whilst it is true that the language of Gen 3:16 is almost identical to that of Gen 4:7, a problem with Foh’s argument is that Gen 4:7 is itself an obscure text.  G. J. Wenham notes that Gen 4:7 has been described as “The most obscure verse in Genesis” (Procksch), going on to say, “Because of its grammatical improprieties and its unusual terminology, commentators are forced to choose between emendation and positing a rare meaning for ‘crouching’.  To compound the problems, other words are of uncertain meaning.”[6]

On Foh’s interpretation of Gen 3:16, G. J. Wenham comments, “There is a logical simplicity about Foh’s interpretation that makes it attractive, but given the rarity of the term ‘urge’ (apart from Genesis 3:16 and 4:7, occurring only in Cant 7:11), certainty is impossible.”[7]

An analysis of Gen 4:7 will not be attempted here.  However, as I. A. Busenitz writes, “Although there are linguistic and thematic parallels between Gen 3:16b and Gen 4:7, contextual differences and interpretive problems indicate that Gen 4:7 cannot be used to interpret the meaning of “desire” in Gen 3:16.”[8]  The uncertainties surrounding Gen 4:7 mean that, “Regardless of which view [of Genesis 4:7] one espouses, neither is sufficiently certain to allow it to become the basis for establishing the meaning of qwv in Gen 3:16.”[9]

Busenitz suggests that the immediate context of Genesis 3 is the key in interpreting Gen 3:16, rather than linguistics.  He notes that the judgments given to the man and the woman both revolve around propagation and seed.  Both involve the earth (used metaphorically of the womb – Ps 139:15, Job 1:21).  Both involve a desire or hunger (the barren womb is insatiable – Prov 30:15-16).  Both involve seed sown (resulting in the conception of new life, plant or human – Num 5:28, 1 Pet 1:23).  Both involve pain and toil in the bringing forth of that new life (the ‘fruit of the womb’ or ‘fruit of the ground’ – Deut 7:13, Luke 1:42).  Thus, “The context speaks not of the desire of woman to rule the man but of the continuation of life in the face of death.  Such is the central element of 3:16a.  Such is the focal point of 3:17-19.  Thus, there is good cause to believe that the same idea is present in 3:16b.”[10]

Despite the pain and toil involved in bearing and raising children, God’s command to be fruitful and fill the earth would still be carried out, and the headship of the man would be maintained.  Despite the pain and toil involved in producing food, the man and the woman would eat bread and human life on earth would be sustained.

Eve’s Desire

The immediate context of the woman’s sentence is the bringing forth of new life through childbearing (Gen 3:16a).  It is likely then that the woman’s desire (Gen 3:16b[11]) also has some connection to childbearing.  In addition, it is important to remember that the sentence was given to an individual woman – Eve.  When ascertaining the meaning of ‘desire’ in Gen 3:16, we must ask what Eve subsequently desired.

In Gen 3:16b God said to Eve, “your desire shall be for your ish (man/husband)”.  The very next recorded utterance of Eve is her triumphant cry following the birth of her firstborn son, “I have gained a man (ish) from the Lord” (Gen 4:1).  Wenham notes that “‘Man’ is nowhere else used to describe a baby boy.”[12]

Eve’s desire, evident in this verse, was not only for her husband, but for a child – a son.  Above all, Eve’s desire was for a son who would be a savior – the ‘seed of the woman’ promised in Gen 3:15 who would crush the serpent’s head and redeem those in bondage to sin.

In what could well be a commentary on Gen 3:16 and 4:1, Jesus says in John 16:21, “A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.”

Unfortunately Eve’s joy at the birth of Cain was to turn to sorrow again, as Cain was not ‘the man’ (John 19:5) but a man-slayer (1 John 3:12-15).  The final recorded words of Eve are in Gen 4:25 – “And Adam knew his wife again, and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.”

As such both of the recorded utterances of Eve following the fall concern her desire for children, in particular the promised ‘seed of the woman’.  Eve could not produce children by herself.  Because of her desire for children, Eve would desire her husband.

Men were and are indispensable in the process of conceiving children; and historically, the continued presence of a father has also been crucial to the successful raising of those children.  The demands of pregnancy, childbirth, nursing and the care of children would also of necessity limit the woman’s participation in the public sphere.

Although the woman’s desire for children would contribute to her dependence upon and subordination to the man, it also ensured that God’s purpose was carried out.  Being fruitful and multiplying’ and filling the earth was always God’s purpose in creation (Gen 1:28).  ‘Godly seed’ was the purpose of marriage (Mal 2:15).  Adam recognized his wife’s vital role when he called her Eve, meaning ‘living one’ or ‘life-giver’.

Whilst the words of Gen 3:16-19 are addressed to two individuals, they also served to introduce Adam and Eve to the world in which they would now be living.  As such we can expect some level of applicability to all mankind.  J. H. Walton comments as follows on the woman’s desire:

The text of 3:16 indicates not a role subordination but a psychological subordination born of the inevitability of a single overwhelming fact: Women desire to have children … What feminism discovered was that as much as some women wanted the same job status as men and as much as some had rejected the validity of marriage, the importance of family, or the need for men in any way, there was a deep-seated, undeniable need to have children.  Betty Friedan said (Chicago Tribune, 27/2/83), “The power of this desire to have a child – when women no longer need to have a child to define themselves as women – seems to be as great or even greater than ever.[13]

Feminists have long recognised a connection between childbearing and women’s subordination to men.  Radical 1970’s feminists such saw procreation as the primary reason for women being marginalized.  Shulamith Firestone wrote in her feminist classic The Dialectic of Sex, “The heart of woman’s oppression is her childbearing and childrearing roles.”[14] Yet, as modern feminist Amy Richards writes, “Thirty-plus years of challenging society’s dictates hasn’t changed many of our core desires – most women still want to procreate and create a family.”[15]

The innate desire of most women to have children and to care for them is often ignored or discounted in today’s society, as one author writes:

Maternal desire is at once obvious and invisible partly because it is so easily confused with other things.  Those fighting for women’s progress too often misconstrue it as a throwback or excuse, a self-curtailment of potential.  Those who champion women’s maternal role too often define it narrowly in the context of service – to one’s child, husband or God.  What each view eclipses is the authentic desire to mother felt by a woman herself – a desire not derived from a child’s need, though responsive to it; a desire not created by a social role, though potentially supported by it; rather a desire anchored in her experience of herself as an agent, an autonomous individual, a person.[16]

Childbearing is painful and difficult, and it means that women must rely upon men.  Yet most women today, as in times past, want and expect to have children.

Spiritual Significance

Both the woman’s punishment and her redemption were found in the process of childbirth (1 Tim 2:15).  The process leading to salvation (the birth of new children of God) would be similar to labor – it would involve toil and struggle.  This is a common figure throughout scripture.  “For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.  And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body” (Rom 8:22-23).

The woman (the ‘bride’ or Israel) desired salvation – just as many barren women in scripture desperately desired a child.  But without ‘the man’ – the saviour – the creation of new sons of God would not be possible (Isa 59:16, 50:2, John 1:12-13).  Thus the woman desired her husband, the bridegroom (Isa 54:4-6, 62:4, Mal 3:1).  He was ‘the seed’ (singular) to whom the promise was made (Gal 3:16-19).  And so “when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth his son, made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons” (Gal 4:4-5).  He suffered and died in order to ‘bring many sons to glory’ (Heb 2:10).  As a result of his saving work, Christ would rule – God “hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the ecclesia, which is his body” (Eph 1:22-23).

All the elements of Gen 3:15-16 come through beautifully in Isaiah 53 and 54.  “And when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him” (Isa 53:2).  “He shall see the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: By His knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for He shall bear their iniquities.  Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong … Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, thou that didst not travail with child, for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord … thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles … thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth.  For thy Maker is thine husband” (Isa 53:10-54:5).

---

For another discussion on desire see A. Perry & P. Wyns, “Discussion on Desire” CeJBI 2/4 (2008): 39-58.

---