Rachel Knight

Publication Date



Gender-Inclusive, Societal Sin, Liberation Theology, Pink Crosses, Staurology


No small amount of feminist theological scholarship has been dedicated to questioning whether a male savior can save women. Some scholars have further asserted that the crucifixion is inherently tainted by its intrinsic theme of violence. This paper argues for the relevance of the cross to women victims of violence. There are many factors that point to the possibility of an inclusive theology of the cross that does not glamorize violence. These include but are not limited to Biblical accounts of the “many women” who walked in solidarity with the battered Christ; female disciples who mourned together after His murder; the necessity that a being who suffers all manner of afflictions be, in some sense, bigender; the alleviation of suffering which many find in the Christian faith; and the systemic and worldly, rather than organic or genuine ways in which the Christian God was masculinized. This paper utilizes liberation theology, especially in regard to the feminicide in Ciudad Juárez, to argue that the crucified Christ is neither an entirely male symbol, nor one which advocates for violence. On the contrary, the cross is a symbol of Christ’s alliance with women. It demonstrates that he was persecuted, as the victims of feminicide are today. The pink crosses in Ciudad Juárez communicate—to women, to perpetrators of violence, and to the world—who’s experience Jesus Christ most identifies with, and therefore, who’s side Christ is on. This perspective on staurology has significant implications for Christian and ex-Christian women today.