Here’s the end of a post from Denny Burk that should be read in full:
At the end of the day, however, this really isn’t an argument about words. Whatever we call it (complementarianism, patriarchy, hierarchy), Moore’s point still rings true. Evangelicals who are unwilling to be counter-cultural are going to find themselves one way or the other accommodating themselves to the feminist spirit of the age and falling short of the biblical ideal. Egalitarians accommodate themselves one way, and complementarians-in-name-only do it in another. But the result is the same when Christians refuse to be counter-cultural. Moore concludes:
Egalitarians are winning the evangelical gender debate, not because their arguments are stronger, but because, in some sense, we are all egalitarians now. The complementarian response must be more than reaction. It must instead present an alternative vision—a vision that sums up the burden of male headship under the cosmic rubric of the gospel of Christ and the restoration of all things in him. It must produce churches that are not embarrassed to tell us that when we say the “Our Father,” we are patriarchs of the oldest kind.
I encourage you to read Moore’s entire essay. I think you’ll find there a much more compelling and prophetic account of the gender debate than what Evans has to offer. You’ll also find out that after all the feminist propaganda is stripped away, biblical patriarchy isn’t such a bad designation after all. It’s simply what the Scriptures teach about manhood and womanhood.
And I join him in recommending Moore’s article: “After Patriarchy, What? Why Egalitarians Are Winning the Gender Debate” JETS 49.3 (2006): 569-76.