Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1999

Preserving Patriarchy: Assimilation, GenderNorms, and Second-Generation KoreanAmerican Evangelicals

Antony W. Alumkal

This ethnographic study of a second-generation Korean American Protestant con-gregation explores the role of religion in assimilation, focusing on emerging gen-der and family norms. The study found that individuals maintained a substantialcommitment to patriarchal gender norms and articulated these norms in languageconsistent with American evangelical theology rather than in ethnic/cultural terms.Members were also influenced by egalitarian norms from the broader Americansociety, and women in particular offered partial resistance to female subordina-tion. The findings suggest that religious affiliation should be given considerationalongside economic variables in analyzing assimilation trajectories among thenew second generation.

INTRODUCTION

The emergence of the American-born/raised second generation of the post-1965 "new immigrants" presents scholars of race and ethnicity with the challengeof revising existing theoretical understandings of assimilation, which are largelybased on the experiences of late nineteenth and early twentieth century EuropeanAmerican immigrants and their descendants, to account for the contemporaryexperiences of individuals with Latin American, Asian, West Indian, and othernon-European ethnic origins. One theoretical framework for analyzing the newsecond generation which has received considerable scholarly attention is Fortesand Zhou's (1993) "segmented assimilation" model. Drawing on case studies of

Direct correspondence to Antony W. Alumkal, Department of Sociology, Princeton University, Prince-ton, New Jersey 08544.

KEY WORDS: assimilation; gender; evangelicalism; Korean Americans.

127

© 1999 Human Sciences Press. Inc.

new second generation communities, Portes and Zhou argue that assimilation doesnot follow a single path into a uniform mainstream society, but can involve different"modes of incorporation."

One (form of adaptation) replicates the time-honored portrayal of growing acculturationand parallel integration into the white middle-class; a second leads straight in the oppositedirection to permanent poverty and assimilation into the underclass; still a third associatesrapid economic advancement with deliberate preservation of the immigrant community'svalues and tight solidarity (Portes and Zhou, 1993, p. 82).

The idea of differentiated assimilation trajectories is actually not new. WillHerberg's Protestant-Catholic-Jew described white American society1 as com-posed of a "triple melting pot," with individuals from the three religious familiesassimilating into different communities (Herberg, 1955). The primary contributionof the segmented assimilation model is the analysis of differentiated assimilationwithin the context of economic behavior, and particularly the insight that assimila-tion need not lead to upward economic mobility. However, a major short-comingof the model is its treatment of the white middle class as a monolithic culturalentity. The authors fail to consider that acculturation into the middle class maytake a variety of forms that do not all necessarily fit the "time-honored portrayal."

Without dismissing the importance of the structural and economic factorswhich Portes and Zhou cite, in this paper I wish to affirm the importance of reli-gious affiliation as a factor significantly impacting assimilation for certain membersof the new second generation. A considerable literature documents the role of reli-gious institutions in both the assimilation and the ethnic mobilization of EuropeanAmerican ethnic groups (Herberg, 1955; Greeley, 1972; Smith, 1978), while agrowing number of studies have documented the same role among the new immi-grant groups (Williams, 1988; Hurh and Kim, 1990; Warner and Wittner, 1998).

Scholars studying religion and ethnicity must be aware of the differences be-tween the old situation and the new. Recent decades have witnessed considerablechanges in the American religious landscape, including an increased religious plu-ralism that involves the growth of religions other than Christianity and Judaism, thedeclining significance of denominational loyalties, and the resurgence of evangel-ical Protestantism (Wuthnow, 1988; Kosmin and Lachman, 1993). These changeshave led to new ways that religion functions in its adaptive role for immigrantgroups. A second major difference between the old and new situations is the factthat most new immigrants are members of racial minority groups. Scholars study-ing new immigrant group religious institutions should therefore be sensitive to theways in which race shapes these institutions at all levels.

One recent study of religion among the new second generation that ad-dresses both the new religious landscape and the issue of racial minority status isBusto's (1996) article "The Gospel According the Model Minority?: Hazarding anInterpretation of Asian American Evangelical College Students." One notable fea-ture of the article is the suggestion that the American evangelical subculture is

128 Alumkal

providing a distinct acculturation path for some Asian Americans:

The universalist message of evangelical Christianity certainly bolsters a type of "built in"dis-identiflcation from non-evangelicals in general ("the world") prompting an alternativeidentity based not on race/ethnicity, but on faith.

Taking the theological call for Christians to be apart from the world... one step further,it may be helpful to think about Asian American evangelicals as part of a larger Christian"people" or "incipient ethnicity" (Busto, 1996, pp. 140-141).

Busto stops short of arguing for ethnogenesis—that evangelicalism operates asa new or alternative ethnicity for Asian American students. Yet his observationsraise important questions about the influence that evangelicalism—and religioussystems generally—can have on assimilation for the new second generation.

This article will attempt to shed light on the possible relationship betweenreligion and assimilation among the new second-generation by presenting an ethno-graphic case study of a second-generation ministry at a Korean American Protestantchurch. Due to space limitations, the article will focus on one important aspectof the congregation—the construction of gender and family norms and how theserelate to the church members' Korean American backgrounds, the subculture ofevangelicalism, and the larger American society.

ASSIMILATION THEORY AND GENDER NORMS

Scholars working in assimilationist paradigms have often assumed that immi-gration to the United States involves adjusting to a more egalitarian and "modern"family system (e.g., Handlin, 1951). This assumption has also colored scholarlydiscussion of gender norms in Asian American communities, which usually depictthe second generation as more egalitarian than the immigrant generation. Thus, inan essay on Korean Americans, Pyong Gap Min describes the difficulty posed byinternational intermarriage. "A marriage between a Korean American woman anda man from Korea, in particular, is very problematic because the Americanizedbride cannot accept the male chauvinism of the groom from Korea" (Min, 1995,p. 221). Min assumes that being "Americanized" involves accepting gender egal-itarianism, or at least a greater amount of egalitarianism than one would find in atypical Korean man. Popular media accounts of second-generation Asian Americanwomen have also reflected the assimilationist perspective, depicting these womenas struggling against their parents' "traditional" (this is, ethnic) gender expecta-tions as the former adapt to American norms.2

A major problem with many assimilationist views as they relates to fam-ily life is that they overlook the considerable diversity that exist in Americancultural norms; not all American subcultures are equally egalitarian when it comesto gender. Among those less egalitarian subcultures is American evangelicalism,estimated to include as many as one in five Americans (Kosmin and Lachman,

Preserving Patriarchy 129

1993, p. 197). The literature on American evangelicalism describe its adherentsas holding patriarchal norms advocating male headship in the church, family, andsometimes even secular spheres of work and government. We should not exag-gerate the extent of these patriarchal tendencies since the American evangelicalsubculture has also been influenced by the feminist currents affecting the rest ofAmerican society (Ammerman, 1987; Hunter, 1987; Watt, 1991). Nor should weoverlook the fact that patriarchy remains present throughout American (and global)society. Still, for second-generation Korean Americans whose acculturation is me-diated by the American evangelical subculture, we are likely to see a substantiallygreater commitment to patriarchal gender values than Min and others would pre-dict. Furthermore, while these values may be at least partially rooted in Koreancultural norms, the language individuals use to describe and justify these norms islikely to be borrowed from the gender discourse of American evangelicalism.

FIELD SITE AND METHODS

The site for this case study is Glory Korean Presbyterian Church (GKPC),located in a suburban town in the New York metropolitan area. GKPC holds twoservices in the afternoon—a Korean language service involving about 150 adultsper week, and an English language service aimed at second-generation youngadults with about 70 people attending each week.

The English Congregation was started by leaders in the church who sawthe need to minister to second-generation Korean American young adults whoare more comfortable worshipping in English than Korean. The church hired JoeKim, a seminary student who had been involved with the church as an under-graduate, to serve as Jundosah3 (later changed to "English Congregation Pastor"when he completed seminary) and preside over the English Congregation. Englishservices began in 1992 with about 35 young adults, mostly undergraduates froma nearby public university who were active in the campus' Korean Christian Fel-lowship (KCF). As word of the congregation spread among KCF members andother Koreans on campus, attendance rose to its current levels.

It is important to note that while GKPC is technically part of a mainline de-nomination (Presbyterian Church, U.S.A.), it is, like most Korean churches, devoidof the theological liberalism characteristic of much of the Protestant mainline.The distinctly "conservative" character of Korean and (first-generation) KoreanAmerican Protestantism can be traced back to the American missionaries whospread Christianity in Korea in the early twentieth century, most of whomemphasized the inerrant character of the Bible and possessed strict standards ofmorality (Hunt, 1980). Other significant influences on Korean Protestantism in-clude the Confucian tradition of hierarchical relationships, the Shamanist traditionof religious emotionalism, and period of persecution under Japanese occupation(Clark, 1986; Chung, 1995).

130 Alumkal

Most members of GKPC's second-generation congregation grew up in otherEast coast Korean churches with theological orientations similar to that of thefirst-generation congregation. However, the fact that second-generation KoreanAmericans are generally more comfortable using English than Korean lead manyKorean churches to use songs, Bible study guides, and other literature from Amer-ican evangelical sources in their youth ministries. In Korean Christian fellowshipsat universities (like KCF mentioned above), where the first generation is absent, theconnection with American evangelicalism becomes more pronounced as groupsemploy "contemporary Christian" forms of worship and rely even more heavily onpublications by evangelical parachurch organizations such as InterVarsity, CampusCrusade for Christ, and Navigators.

Still, distinctly Korean elements remain in second generation like GKPC.Some of the ethnic features that mark GKPC as a Korean church include a distinctform of prayer associated with Korean revivals (see Blair, 1957, pp. 66-67), theoccasional use of Korean language hymns, and sermons that often refer that to thecongregation members' Korean American backgrounds. Many GKPC membersI talked with told me they preferred to attend a Korean American church sincethey were accustomed to worshipping in such a setting, and because they couldrelate more easily to people who had the same ethnic background. But at thesame time, they expressed the belief that GKPC should be open to all peopleregardless of race. Quite a few members were critical of the Korean Americanfirst generation, describing them as too "ethnocentric" and not embracing theuniversality of the gospel. Thus, the GKPC English congregation, like many ethnicreligious organizations, displayed a tension between an ethnic particularism and areligious universalism (cf. Lincoln and Mamiya, 1990, pp. 12-13).

Data for this study were gathered using participant observation at the GKPCEnglish Congregation services and small group meetings over a two year period andthrough taped, formal interviews with twenty-five church members. Initial entr6ewas not difficult since I was introduced to Joe Kim through a mutual acquaintance.Furthermore, Joe was aware of the lack of literature on the second generationin the Korean American church and was eager to assist in the study. However,establishing rapport with the church members as an ethnic outsider (of Indian andFilipino descent) who was also several years older than they were took some effort.The church was officially open to people of all races, and it was common to see oneor two non-Koreans (usually friends of church members) on a given Sunday. Butthe church was not actively welcoming of newcomers, a "Korean trait" for whichseveral church members apologized to me. Persistence in talking with memberseventually paid off.

My male gender undoubtedly had some impact on the responses I receivedduring interviews. It is likely that men were more willing to express their beliefsin gender hierarchy with me than they would have been with a female interviewer.The effect of my gender on female respondents was less clear to me. Women mayhave been less willing to express egalitarian opinions for fear of causing offense.

Preserving Patriarchy 131

Conversely, they may been less willing to express their belief in gender hierarchyfor fear of appearing weak or passive and thus conforming to the stereotype manynon-Asians have of Asian women. It is noteworthy that several women shared withme their criticisms of Korean men and the sexism in traditional Korean culture,something they may have been reluctant to do with a Korean male interviewer.

I should also say something about my religious identity as perceived bymembers of the congregation. Joe was aware from the beginning that I comefrom a less conservative Protestant background, and he never seemed troubledby this. Most lay members of the church, on the other hand, tended to equate"Christian" with "evangelical" and had little awareness of non-evangelical/liberalProtestantism. Consequently, most church members assumed that since I considermyself a "Christian," I must hold the same theological beliefs that they do. Thisalmost certainly led to an increased openness by interview respondents, helpingmitigate the effects of my being an ethnic outsider.

All but a few of the people I interviewed were single and either college studentsor recent graduates. Therefore, questions relating to family norms measure ideol-ogy rather than practice; it remains to be seen whether or not the two will divergein the future as members start real families. All names, including the name of thecongregation, have been changed. For individuals who go by Korean first names, Isubstituted Korean fictional names, and likewise for those with American names.

AUTHORITY IN THE FAMILY

Pyong Gap Min argues that the influence of Confucianism in Korea helpedestablish "an extreme form of patriarchy" in which a husband is considered theprimary decision maker in the family, "exercising complete authority over his wifeand children" (Min, 1995, p. 221). He further argues that immigration to the UnitedStates, which is usually followed by women's entry into the labor force, has ledto only marginal increases in women's relative power in marriages. Hurh and Kim(1984) also found that men did not give up much power following immigration tothe United States, reflected in the fact that women remained primarily responsiblefor housework whether or not they were also working outside the home.

When I asked members of GKPC to discuss their families, the situations theydescribed were less clearly patriarchal than the above portrayals. Most respondentsdescribed their fathers as the unambiguous "head" of the family, but many alsoconceded that their mothers wield considerable influence. Still, in only a few caseswere fathers taking a significant role in assisting with housework. It was mostlyleft to the children to relieve their heavily burdened mothers.

In addition to asking about the real situations of their families, I asked churchmembers what they believed the ideal situation should be, including the futuremarital roles they saw for themselves. The majority of respondents, both male andfemale, told me that they believed men and women were meant to have differentroles in the family, with men being "the head." Significantly, they generally did not

132 AluConversely, they may been less willing to express their belief in gender hierarchymkal

justify their views with reference to Korean cultural tradition. Rather, their argu-ments were characteristic of American evangelicalism's discourse on the family,citing the Bible as justification for male authority. Also typical of American evan-gelical discourse, respondents frequently offered qualifications to the principle ofmale leadership, emphasizing that it was to be exercised in a loving manner andthat women are not be without some voice. A typical response from a male churchmember:

Q: Do you think men and women are meant to fulfill different roles in society?

A: Yes, I do. 1 don't want to sound chauvinistic, but I do believe that men should be thehead of the family as Christ is the head of the church. And I think women should be verysupportive of their husbands and be submissive. But I think husbands should really lovetheir wives a great deal so that they have no problem being submissive, because the husbandwon't take advantage of that.

A female respondent offered her support for the principle of male headship in thefamily, again with some qualifications:

Q: Do you believe that men should be the "head of the household" or do you think husbandsand wives should be equal partners?

A: I don't think spouses are equal. I mean, they are, but the husband is the head of the house.I think it says that in the Bible. Before I didn't believe it, but now I've gained more wisdom.(Laughs)

Q: What do you think that should look like?

A: I think it's team work for parents . . . . It shouldn't be that the mother just stays in thekitchen and has no voice in the house.

The responses were far from uniform. While two women in my interviewsample offered little qualification to male headship, two other women stated thatthey flatly disagreed with the principle. A few other respondents seemed to becaught in the middle, articulating equally hierarchical and egalitarian views, as thefemale member below:

Q: Do you believe that men should be "head of the household" or do you think husbandsand wives should be equal partners?

A: Can it be a mixture of both? I think it is. I think the husband is the head of the household,but a true head of the household sees his wife as an equal kind of partner. I mean, they'recommitted together to raising this family, and there is no disrespect for each other. But thelast word comes down to—if you had to put a chief in command, it would be the husband.But a good chief in command consorts with all his leaders. So there's a sense of partnershipquality, but then there is a sense of leadership quality as well.

WOMEN AND THE CHURCH

In response to questions related to gender roles in the church, members offeredmuch stricter hierarchical views than they did for the family. With only a fewexceptions, members of GKPC believed that positions of high leadership in the

Preserving Patriarchy 133

church—those of pastor and elder—were appropriate only for men. These viewswere consistent with both the pattern among Korean immigrant churches, wherefemale leaders are virtually non-existent, and the prevalent (but not unanimous)belief among American evangelicals.

Significantly, among those not agreeing with the exclusion of women fromchurch leadership was the English Congregation pastor. While admitting to me thathe once opposed women leaders, the influence of strong women Sunday schoolteachers during his youth, coupled with theological training at a mainline seminarythat challenged his formerly more rigid beliefs, eventually led him to change hismind. Joe is aware that expressing his views could upset some members of thecongregation and has decided to "move slowly" on the issue of women's leadership.He addressed the issue during one sermon based on the encounter between Jesusand a Samaritan woman in John 4:1-42. Joe argued that Jesus defied the culturalnorms of his day regarding gender and ethnic boundaries, and then suggestedthat Jesus would approve of women's ordination. Anticipating disagreement, headded, "You might be asking, 'Joe, why do you bring up these controversial issues?'Because Jesus did the same. He was a radical rabbi."

Rather than becoming upset by Joe's sermon, most people in the churchseemed not to have been paying attention. Almost no one I talked with was awarethat he supported women's ordination to the ministry. This was even true of one ofthe English Congregation deacons who firmly opposed women's ordination, yetclaimed that he and Joe "very much see eye to eye" on theological matters.

Whatever is behind this lack of awareness of Joe's views, the fact remainsthat most church members I talked with disapproved of women's ordination. Thisposition was always justified with reference to the teachings of the Bible, whichthey believed prohibited women from holding authority over men in the church.Some members, both male and female, noted the connection between family andchurch life, and were concerned that female church leaders teaching and holdingauthority over men would jeopardize male headship in the family. As one man toldme, "Having women leading in church would create a dilemma for men. They areleaders at home, then come to church and are subject to this woman. So as followsin family should follow for church."

The other frequently mentioned justification for barring women from thepastorate, again shared by both male and female respondents, was that womenwere more emotional and less rational than men, and therefore were not suitedfor leadership positions. There is nothing distinctly Korean or distinctly evan-gelical about this type of gender stereotyping, though its use in barring womenfrom the pastorate probably reflects both contexts. I should point out that thisargument is highly ironic given that Korean American churches are plagued byfrequent schisms caused largely by male leaders vying for authority (Shin and Park,1988).

We have seen that church members often made attempts to soften the princi-ple of male leadership when applied to the family. Such efforts were largely absent

134 Alumkal

from discussions of the church. Whether it is because the influence of Koreantradition remains strong, or because contemporary American evangelicalism simi-larly restricts women's roles in the churches, the second-generation KoreanAmericans at GKPC are generally not willing to depart from the pattern of churchleadership with which they grew up.

GENDER AND WORK

It was in the sphere of work that members of GKPC recognized the greatestdegree of potential equality between men and women. Even many of those whoinsisted that men should be dominant in the family and church did not distinguishbetween careers appropriate for men and those appropriate for women. The onlyexceptions were one female member who thought that "men are meant to be leadersand women are meant to be followers" and two respondents, one male and onefemale, who thought that the very highest leadership positions in society (likePresident of the United States) should probably be occupied by men.

One qualification which several members added to their responses was thata woman who decided to have a family must put this concern before her career.Some suggested it would be best for a woman with young children to take a fewyears off from work in order to give them proper nurture. But no one I talked tothought it was wrong for a married woman with children to have a career.

The church members' relatively egalitarian views of gender and work canbe explained partially by their parents' backgrounds. Immigration often broughtchanges in the roles of Korean women. Many women who had been housewivesin Korea were required to work in the United States for their families to sur-vive economically. This often involved helping to run family owned small busi-nesses, though some women sought outside employment (Hurh and Kim, 1984).Also important is that the primary reason most Koreans immigrated to the UnitedStates was to find economic opportunities both for themselves and for their chil-dren. In fact, the vast majority of GKPC members had at least one parent work-ing in a family owned small business, and these parents uniformly encouragedtheir children to make the assimilationist move from small business or otheremployment in the Korean American ethnic economy to professional careers inmainstream American society. Under these circumstances, the gender differen-tiation regarding work found in traditional Korean culture tends to break downas Korean immigrants push their children, male and female, toward economicadvancement.

The retreat of these Korean American evangelicals from pre-immigration gen-der role expectations in the realm of work parallels that found among non-Koreanevangelicals. While still idealizing the "traditional" family with a mother staying athome, American evangelicals have largely accommodated to the economic realitythat a middle-class lifestyle requires two incomes (Watt, 1991; Demmitt, 1992).

Preserving Patriarchy 135

The individuals in this study, who also aspire to comfortable middle-class status,have generally made the same accommodation.

WOMEN AND PATRIARCHY: ACCEPTANCE AND RESISTANCE

To summarize so far: members of GKPC generally support the principleof male headship in the family, but with varying degrees of qualification; theygenerally give much stronger support to the principle of male headship in thechurch, with the notable exception of the English Congregation pastor; and theygive only limited supported to gender differentiation in the world of work. Ifthis looks straightforward, comments by many of the church members, especiallywomen, point to a more complicated picture.

The literature on evangelical women details strategies that they employ forsubverting the patriarchal norms in their religious belief system, emphasizing thatwoman engage in a dialectic of conformity and resistance to male domination(Rose, 1987; Stacey, 1990; Pevey et al., 1996). Similar strategies were evidentamong women in this study. We have already seen the qualified language thatmembers, both male and female, used to describe male headship in the family.Several women in the church went much further in rhetorically challenging thepatriarchy they simultaneously claimed to uphold.

One member named Jean illustrated well this dialectic between acceptanceand resistance. When I asked her if she approved of women being ordained aspastors, she gave a response consistent with evangelical theology, stating thatthe pastorate was reserved for men. "I just believe God has given man a typeof authority for some reason. And it's biblical-women have to be subservient."However, she immediately added that women can still play a powerful role in thechurch, citing the case of a pastor's wife.

I think for the pastor and his wife, it's kind of equal, you know? Yes, the man is the pastor,but the woman is the woman of prayer behind it. And she's the one—in that way, they'rekind of equal. It's just that visibly it's the man, and the woman is more behind the scenes.And I think behind the scenes is so much more imp—It's a blessing. It's a real blessing. SoI think in that way it's equal. It's just the way it's portrayed is a bit more of the man.

Some of Jean's words—"visibly," "behind the scenes," and "portrayed"—suggestthat women's recognition of male authority is at some level a "performance" andnot something they have completely internalized. Several other women in thechurch made statements suggesting that this was the case.

This "performance" motif, as well as the dialectic between acceptance andresistance to patriarchy, was evident in an interview I conducted with a womennamed Je Young. I asked her a question about the balance of power in a householdthat she answered with an ambiguous response:

Q: Do you believe that the husband should be "the head of the household," or do you thinkhusbands and wives should be equal?

136 Alumkal

A: I would consider the male the head of house, but as far as decisions and responsibilitiesgo, I think it's pretty much equal — As far as decisions, if he says something and I disagree,there's going to be a problem. It's not going to be me being submissive. (Laughs)

This ambiguity gave way to the suggestion (veiled by humor) that the recognitionof male authority is simply a performance put on by women.

Q: What do you think it means for the male to be the head of the household?A: It's just to make him feel good. (Hysterical laughter) No, I'm just joking! I'mjust joking!

She then retreated from this view and offered a much less qualified acceptance ofmale headship.

I just think (male headship) should be the situation in the family, at least for me. And whenmajor decisions come, I would definitely give it to the husband. When I said we'd have aproblem if we disagreed, I meant small stuff. But if we're talking about (a major decision),I could see just giving it to the husband. I don't know, I think I'm still very traditional inthat way. I'm not a feminist at all. (Laughs)

What are we to make of Je Young's responses? Apparently she finds some-thing humorous about these issues. Interestingly, her laughter comes after she hasviolated a social norm—in the first two instances, it is the norm of male headshipassociated with evangelicalism and Korean culture, and in the third instance, it isthe norm of gender egalitarianism associated with "feminist" thinking. Perhapshumor provides Je Young with a way of coping with the tension between thesetwo competing value systems.

To some extent, the GKPC women's resistance to patriarchal norms can beseen as part of a general pattern found among socially subordinate people, whosecretly critique those in the dominant group, employing what James Scott referredto as a "hidden transcript" (Scott, 1990). At least one study of first-generationKorean church women argued that they engage in various forms of resistanceto their institution's patriarchal norms (Kim, 1996). But for second-generationwomen the issue is further complicated by the influence of egalitarian norms foundin the broader American culture. We see above Je Young's (nervous?) laughterwhen she declared that she was not a feminist. Another woman in the churchnamed Nancy also seemed to reveal the influence of feminist norms:

Q: Do you think it is best for a married woman with children to stay home while the husbandworks...A: Uh-uh, don't you dare! (Laughs)Q:... or do you think there's nothing wrong with both spouses having careers.A: I think there's nothing wrong with both spouses having careers, but as a mother the firstpriority—Oh, gosh! I'm going to get myself in trouble in this one. I do think the first priorityis family if you decide to have a family... It does not mean that you can't have a job thatis also a priority, meaning it's a part of who you are and what you need to do.

Despite the fact that all respondents were assured of anonymity, Nancy fearedgetting "in trouble" with someone. The question is, in trouble with whom? One

Preserving Patriarchy 137

answer would be her female peers in the Korean American church. But given thatmost of those women hold similar or even more hierarchical views regarding genderroles, they are not likely to be the group in question. More likely, she was feeling the"gaze" of women in the larger society with more egalitarian gender norms, normswhich she partially accepts and partially rejects. I eventually showed Nancy theinterview fragment and asked her with whom she feared getting in trouble. Sheresponded that she had in mind "career women" in mainstream American society.Given that Nancy was applying to a professional graduate program at the time ofthe interview, it is not surprising that she was concerned about how her gendervalues would be viewed by those outside of the Korean American church.

CONCLUSION

From this study we get a complex picture of the construction of gender normsamong second-generation Korean Americans evangelicals. Rather than a simplemovement from patriarchal to egalitarian gender norms, as might be predicted bytraditional assimilation theory, the individuals in this study maintained a substantial(though far from absolute) commitment to gender hierarchy, articulating thesenorms in the language of American evangelicalism rather than referring to Koreanculture. However, like other American evangelicals, the individuals in this studywere not insulated from feminist currents in American society.

This study shows the problems associated with treating American society likea monolithic category in discussions of assimilation. Even Portes and Zhou's seg-mented assimilation model does not go far enough in that "the white middle-class"remains undifferentiated. As we see from these findings, religious affiliation (inthis case evangelicalism) can have a significant affect on the path of acculturation.Furthermore, while this article focuses on gender norms, the larger study on whichit is based found evangelical affiliation affecting a wide range of values, includingattitudes toward work and education, political views, and attitudes toward ethnicintermarriage.

Finally, an important question that needs to be addressed is why second-generation women would participate in the Korean American church, even if thepatriarchy found in this institution is limited, given that these women have otheroptions. For example, most non-Korean Presbyterian congregations accept womenin church leadership positions in principle if not always in practice. And unlikemost of their immigrant parents, members of the second generation generally do nothave language and cultural barriers preventing their participation in non-Koreaninstitutions.

Part of the answer to the above question lies in the fact that the Koreanchurch is one of the few institutions available for Korean Americans who wish tointeract with their co-ethnics. As racial minorities and as people raised in immi-grant households, the individuals in this study felt some degree of alienation from

138 Alumkal

mainstream American society. Most of them reported that the Korean Americanchurch was a place where they felt "comfortable" relating to people with similarcultural backgrounds. Additionally, GKPC seemed to offer members a place wherethey could de-emphasize their racial minority status by proclaiming (in languagecharacteristic of contemporary evangelicalism)4 that while they were proud of be-ing Korean Americans, their "true" identities were as (evangelical) Christians. Forwomen, the cost of being an evangelical involves accepting to some degree thegender subordination inherent in evangelical theology. Apparently a significantnumber of second-generation Korean American women find that the benefits ofbeing evangelicals outweigh the costs.

ENDNOTES

1. Herberg significantly excluded blacks and other racial minorities from his analysis of "American"society.

2. See for example "Asian-American Women Struggling to Move Past Cultural Expectations," NewYork Times, January 23, 1994.

3. This term translates literally as "evangelist" and refers to a non-ordained pastor usually servingyouth.

4. Following Omi and Winant (1986), we can speak of leading evangelical organizations advancinga particular "racial project." This project, which conceives of a common Christian identity amongbelievers transcending racial divisions, and of Christianity offering the only true path to racialreconciliation in American society, strongly shaped discussion of race at GKPC. For examples ofcontemporary evangelical discourses on race, see McCartney (1994) and Hunt and Hunt (1991,pp. 319,352-353).

REFERENCES

Ammerman, N. T. (1987). Bible Believers: Fundamentalists in the Modern World, Rutgers UniversityPress, New Brunswick, NJ.

Blair, W. N. (1957). Gold in Korea, Presbyterian Church in the USA, New York.Busto, R. V. (1996). The gospel according to the model minority?: Hazarding an interpretation of Asian

American evangelical college students. Amerasia Journal 22: 133-147.Chung, J. K. (1995). Christian contextualization in Korea. In Kwon, H. (ed.), Korean Cultural Roots:

Religion and Social Thoughts, North Park College and Seminary, Chicago, pp. 81-104.Clark, D. (1986). Christianity in Modern Korea, University Press of America, New York.Demmitt, K. P. (1992). Loosening the ties that bind: Accommodation of dual-earner families in a

conservative Protestant church. Review of Religious Research 34: 3-19.Greeley, A. M. (1972). The Denominational Society: A Sociological Approach to Religion in America,

Scott, Foresman and Company, Glenview, III.Handlin, O. (1951). The Uprooted, Little, Brown, Boston.Herberg, W. (1955). Protestant, Catholic, Jew, Doubleday, Garden City, NY.Hunt, E. N., Jr. (1980). Protestant Pioneers in Korea, Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY.Hunt, K., and Hunt, G. (1991). For Christ and the University: The Story of Intervarsity Christian

fellowship, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL.Hunter, J. D. (1987). Evangelicalism: The Coming Generation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Hurh, W. M., and Kim, K. C. (1984). Korean Immigrants in America, Associated University Press,

Cranbury, NJ.

Preserving Patriarchy 139

Hurh, W. M., and Kim, K. C. (1990). Religious participation of Korean immigrants in the United States.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 29(1): 19-34.

Kim, J. H. (1996). The labor of compassion: Voices of "churched" Korean American women. AmerasiaJournal 22: 93-105.

Kosmin, B. A., and Lachman, S. P. (1993). One Nation Under God: Religion in Contemporary Society,Harmony Press, New York.

Lincoln, C. E., and Mamiya, L. H. (1990). The Black Church in the African American Experience,Duke University Press, Durham.

McCartney, B. (1994). A call to unity. In Janssen, A. (ed.), Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper, Focuson the Family Publishing, Colorado Springs, pp. 157-167.

Min, P. G. (1995). Korean Americans. In Min, P. G., (ed.), Asian Americans: Contemporary Trendsand Issues, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 199-231.

Omi, M., and Winant, H. (1986). Racial Formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1980s,Routledge, New York.

Pevey, C., William, C. L., and Ellison, C. G. (1996). Male God imagery and female submission: Lessonsfrom a southern Baptist ladies' Bible class. Qualitative Sociology 19: 173-193.

Portes, A., and Zhou, M. (1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants.The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 530: 74-96.

Rose, S. D. (1987). Women warriors: The negotiation of gender in a Charismatic community. Socio-logical Analysis 48: 245-258.

Scott, J. C. (1990). Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts, Yale University Press,New Haven.

Shin, E. H., and Park, H. (1988). An analysis of causes of schisms in ethnic churches: The case ofKorean-American churches. Sociological Analysis 49: 234-248.

Smith, T. L. (1978). Religion and ethnicity in America. American Historical Review 83: 1115-1185.Stacey, J. (1990). Brave New families: Stories ofDomestic Upheaval in Late Twentieth Century America,

Basic Books, New York.Warner, R. S., and Winner, J. G. (1998) (eds). Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious Communities and

the New Immigration, Temple University Press, Philadelphia.Watt, D. H. (1991). A Transforming Faith: Explorations of Twentieth-Century American Evangelical-

ism, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.Williams, R. B. (1988). Religions of Immigrants From India and Pakistan: New Thread in the American

Tapestry, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Wuthnow, R. (1988). The Restructuring of American Religion, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

140 Alumkal