Similar Posts


  1. This Wonder Woman movie is more closely a portrayal of “radical feminism,” while what most of us Believers think of as “feminism” is “liberal feminsm” and is pretty much anti-man, anti-family, anti-safety (or value) for women and children.

  2. I would be completely leery of watching any movies that doesnt portray godly womanhood. Keeper of the home, submission to husband, having a meek and quiet spirit, modesty..hmm I dont see any of these things in wonder woman. I will pass on this movie.

  3. Research on this character shows her to be far from anything a Christian should endorse. On inception She was portrayed as a bisexual goddess. The deceiver seems to be creeping into most all our media. Let’s pray for better discernment.

    1. I’ve never read any of the comic books, Glenda, but that is not how she was portrayed in this movie. Even so, I would certainly not want you to see the movie if it would violate your conscious to do so. I am glad I saw it and felt it contained many positive messages, as noted above.

      1. Neither have I read the comics. I just like to look a bit deeper at what our culture presents as entertainment. I came along when Dale Evans was an example of a heroine for girls. I gave away my age didn’t I….I’m just trying to encourage our younger Mothers to be very careful of what they allow to enter the minds of their children. Our enemy is very subtle, this we’ve know from the time of Eve.
        I enjoy your blog and often point it out to others. You are doing a good work Jennifer. Keep it up.

      2. I suggest you watch the movie again. Diana is definitely, absolutely in a society where lesbianism and bisexuality are normal and accepted. Do you recall the scene when she and Trevor were in the boat?

        Wonder Woman: “You refer to reproductive biology? … Yeah, I know. I know all about that.”
        Wonder Woman’s male helper Steve: “I refer to that and, you know, other things.”
        WW: “The pleasures of the flesh.”
        Steve: “Do you…know about that?”
        WW: “I’ve read all 12 volumes of Clio’s treatises on bodily pleasure.”
        Steve: “All 12, huh? Did you you bring any of those with you?”
        WW: “You would not enjoy them. … They came to the conclusion that men are essential for procreation but when it comes to pleasure, unnecessary.”

        When her aunt Antiope died, the woman who ran and flung herself over her was Menalippe, her lover.

        Diana and Trevor had sex. That was obvious.

        Diana was drawn to babies because she’d never seen one in person.

        The quote about what you believe is not a quote about god. This is a movie where a plurality of gods and goddesses do exist. That quote was about what you believe everything is all about.

        Diana embraced her sexuality, not femininity. She was owning herself in how she dressed, not hiding who she was, not denying anything, and showing her powerful body without shame, and rather than her coming across as sexualized, even to you, she comes across as powerful.

        You really don’t know what modern-day feminism is about. We want equality, not more power. We know there are good men out there, a lot of them, but we want to see the men who do rape us given more than a slap on the wrist because jail might be hard on them.

        This isn’t the Christian movie you’ve mistaken it for. It’s just that good of a movie, that you don’t want to dislike it. It’s overtly feminist, and it’s amazing. I look forward to the sequel.

        Some interesting trivia. William Moulton Marston, creator of Wonder Woman, was in a polyamorous relationship. His wife and girlfriend both lived with him, and he had kids with both. He was very much into the power of women and believed in female supremacy. Diana’s lasso and wrist cuffs represent BSDM tools.

        1. I never claimed Wonder Woman is a Christian film, Anna, only that it contains some truths that resonate with my Christian beliefs. Before you accuse me of reading too much between the lines or seeing things in the story that are not obvious to other viewers, you need to reexamine your own claims about this film.

          Diana comes from a society of women, true, but no mention is made in the film of their sexual orientation. They are Amazons. There are no men on the island and no contact (until now) with the outside world. How could bisexuality be considered “normal and accepted” in such a society?

          You say it’s obvious Diana had sex with Steve Trevor, yet all we are shown is one kiss, fully upright, fully clothed, no groping or hurried shedding of heavy coats or any other items of clothing. Just a single kiss. Then a shot of the snow outside. Then a shot of the team reassembling the following morning, with no sidelong looks or knowing glances between any of the characters. Maybe the kiss led to something more. Maybe it didn’t. The viewer must make a lot of assumptions to fill in the blank either way. Given that Steve was so protective of Diana from the very beginning and behaved in such a noble and upright manner throughout the movie, it’s at least within the scope of possibility that one kiss is as far as it went.

          You say Diana owned herself in how she dressed and came across as powerful rather than sexualized, yet the primary gripe I’ve read from feminists protesting the film is that Gal Gadot’s costume served to hypersexualize and objectify her. They also complain that the male characters made too many comments about Diana’s unsurpassed beauty (which was undeniably feminine, if you didn’t notice, and made use of a little extra padding to accentuate her curves even further).

          In the movie, Diana’s lasso and wrist cuffs are used strictly for fighting evil, gaining intelligence, and deflecting bullets. No other purpose for those tools is mentioned or implied.

          Here’s some interesting trivia for you: You say Wonder Woman is overtly feminist, yet director Patty Jenkins insists “She’s not a feminist. It never occurred to her that she would treat somebody differently to somebody else, which is the stronger statement.”

          As for Diana’s comments on the boat, her final statement is controversial but technically true: “For procreation, men are integral, but for purposes of pleasure, unnecessary.” Sadly, when sex is completely stripped of its procreative potential and pursued solely for pleasure, as is often the case in our culture today, her statement seems only logical. However, God designed pleasure and procreation to go hand-in-hand and to be enjoyed only within the context of marriage by a husband and wife committed to one another and to raising the children who result from their union. Anybody okay with divorcing these two aspects of sex must inevitably reach the same conclusion as the author Diana was quoting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.