A Wild Game Dinner Turned Into a Hot Debate Over Gender Equality and Billy Graham

Another day another #MeToo controversy

Another day, another #MeToo controversy

That’s not something you’d consider when you think of a faith-based fishing trip. Yet, that’s the Bethel Baptist Church’s argument used to defend their men-only raffle ticket rules.

“If a man is not faithful to his own individuality, he cannot be loyal to anything.”-Claude McKay-

A little geographic background

North Union Township is a township in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, United States. It is known for having a friendly conservative population and beautiful wide-open terrain conducive to many outdoor gaming sports.

These unique regulations are the latest rendition of the famous Billy Graham rule, which instructs evangelists to refuse private interactions with women.

It is a precautionary measure to prevent an innocent meet-up between opposite genders from turning into a scandal.

However, Emma Smaniotto questioned the integrity of this gender-biased rule. Her outburst came after organizers stopped her from claiming a rightfully-earned raffle prize (a spot in a bow fishing trip).

“The church pretty much scolded us for being female.”-Emma Smaniotto remarked in her interview with WTAE-

Unfortunately, she’s not the first nor the last woman to experience this blatant form of gender discrimination.

However, before considering the implications of this practice, let’s recap what happened with Emma Smaniotto.

The scoop: A wild game dinner turned into a hot debate over gender equality

As a nature enthusiast, Smaniotto did not give it a second thought when she dropped her $10 raffle ticket for the bow fishing trip. Even though the guest pastor informed attendees the prize was reserved for men quipping that winners must make sure to “leave those wives at home.”

Like most people, she considered it a lighthearted joke. Her assumptions were confirmed by another female guest who dropped her name for the coveted trip.

Unfortunately for them, they were both wrong.

It turned out that the organizers were serious about the rigid rule, proven when they disqualified the first name that got pulled out from the raffle bag.

Suffice to say, Smaniotto was shocked when the unnamed female entry was discarded from the winning list.

“It felt unreal and ridiculous.”-Emma Smaniotto-

In an ironic turn of events, the second name was her own. Yet, that did not deter the pastor. He continued to draw another entry to ensure that a man received the prize.

Smaniotto concluded the story on her Facebook post stating,

“I have hunted and fished with many men in my lifetime and have been treated with respect while in the field — would this not be the same case if I attended the ‘church’ fishing event?”

It’s a reasonable query considering how churches are supposed to be a haven for community members. It does not seem out of place to expect the same from a faith-based fishing trip.

May the truth be told?

The Bethel Baptist Church quickly released a statement in response to Samaniotto’s viral post.

“It was a matter of personal standards and protection, and there was no intent of discrimination.”-Rev.Bryan Kelley-

He supported this by stating that the church ‘gives away door prizes every year, available to all in attendance”. The only exceptions to this rule are underage guests and individuals with a criminal record (especially those related to firearms).

Additionally, he referenced the Billy Graham Rule and #MeToo controversies to justify the gender-biased rules.

“We will not put ourselves in a position that could bring about a false accusation and thus bring a multitude of problems.” -Rev. Bryan Kelley-

He went on to say that he did not understand why the “two ladies, put their cards in that container although the stipulations were given twice.”

“Nevertheless, the church respects all women, and by no means would do anything intentionally to make one feel discriminated.” -Rev. Bryan Kelley-

Smaniotto begs to differ.

She pointed out that the Church could have altered rules if they wanted. Men could have brought wives to the fishing expedition. That would have created a safe environment for female winners and evened the numbers. Instead, the faith-based organizers practiced gender discrimination and inequality in the ruse of the so-called self-preserving Billy Graham Rule.

After speaking to some local residents in North Union Township, there are mixed feelings on the position that following The Billy Graham Rule implies. Many are not sure if it is self preservation, gender discrimination, or a combination.

Moreover, she found the Church’s attempts at apologizing disrespectful when they offered her a ‘pity prize’ in the form of a private fishing trip with her father.

Smaniotto claimed that she didn’t want a half-hearted apology. She wanted ‘equal rights.’

The Billy Graham Rule: Is it sexist or self-preservation?

You’re probably wondering what the Billy Graham Rule is and whether it gives men in power the right to refuse cross-gender interactions in private settings.

The ‘puritanical code of conduct’ first appeared in 1948. It’s part of the Modesto Manifesto. It shares the dos and don’ts of public interactions between pastors and the general public. Billy Graham himself followed the handbook verbatim by all claims.

One rule, in particular, has repeatedly made headlines in recent years. It teaches men to decline invitations and meetings where they will have to interact with women alone. It includes everything from traveling, dining to a meeting.

The sole exception to this rule was the wife.

Billy Graham introduced it to ensure that he was not swayed by sinful temptations or falsely accused. He also wanted to stop himself from cheating on his significant other when he was away from home. Therefore Graham implemented measures to protect the Church and its pious image.

We have seen former Vice President Mike Pence spin this gender-biased resolution into a romantic tale in the past. Even though. It’s a misguided method to protect his marriage.

Alternatively, Robert Forster was caught in a lawsuit while adhering to the same principles. For him, the Billy Graham Rule was a shield to save his political career and image. Due to this, he did not hire nor speak to female employees/journalists without the presence of a third party.

These seemingly law-abiding men (and organizations) have created barriers for women on all three accounts because of their vices and guilt. Applauding their self-awareness (or in some cases, religious stances) would undermine the drastic implications of this gender-biased policy.

As Gambler and Smaniotto already pointed out, the rule promotes gender discrimination in social settings.

Moreover, critics state that: “The most harmful aspect of the Graham/Pence rule is this: It keeps women out of the room.” It makes women feel like liability and often sexually objectifies them instead of protecting them.

Additionally, it disregards sexual orientation and the possibility of the LGBTQ community feeling equally vulnerable in these situations.

The rights and rules to protect them do not exist yet. Nor have the churchmen taken strict actions against proven allegations faced by the religious institutions.

In a nutshell

Whether that ‘room’ is a harmless fishing expedition, career-building opportunity, or promotion, as long as men hide behind the Billy Graham Rule, gender equality will remain a dream. All thanks to an evangelist afraid of getting entangled in an affair and, in turn, followed by the modern man’s dread of the #MeToo movement.

It’s high time that women raise their voices against this injustice. We can’t let our life get manipulated by a code of conduct enforced decades ago because some men are afraid to slip.

There are always options available to those willing to be actively inclusive and encourage gender diversity in leisure and business activities. The only problem is that some men do not have the motivation (or interest) to change the dynamics.

As a result, we continue to live in a misogynist world where the noble gentlemen’s club grows, women frequently shoved into the sidelines and opportunistic people continue to take advantage of one another.

North Union Township, a place where hearts are enriched and lives are changed. This incident has created a debate in this town but North Union Township is not alone. The roars of similar situations penetrate throughout the world.

What are your thoughts?