In light of the kind of feedback I have received from readers over the past few years, I think it is apropos to offer my disclaimer on my views on women. It may come as a shock to my regular readers and foes alike that there are some views that I don't hold about women:
1. I don't believe in limiting myself to courting supermodels, exceptionally attractive women, and the such like.
2. I don't believe that if I am a lazy slob with a poor physique, poor hygiene, poor earning potential, and poor social skills that I should expect to win the affections of women with a higher social status than me.
3. I don't believe that women have to make me happy, always agree with me, or just tell me what I want to hear, not even as a condition for being my wife.
4. I don't believe that I am entitled to love and physical intimacy of any woman unless she freely gives it to me by the vow of marriage.
5. I don't believe husbands have the right to be inconsiderate and unresponsive to their wives' concerns.
6. I don't believe that any woman has to get married and/or have children in order to be complete.
7. I don't believe it's necessarily a sin for women to work outside the home or even to have a prestigious career.
8. I don't believe in paying someone less or turning them down for a secular job simply because they are female.
9. I don't believe in taking away a woman's right to vote or hold public office (unless we want to do the same for men as well).
10. I don't believe that women are necessarily less logical than men.
11. I don't believe that women are necessarily less intelligent or competent than men.
12. I don't believe that woman are necessarily less virtuous than men.
13. I don't believe that women are necessarily less spiritual than men.
14. I don't believe that women have less intrinsic worth than men.
15. I don't believe in treating the female body as a commodity for media (e.g., the advertising industry).
16. I don't believe in leering at women and/or making sexually suggestive comments about their bodies.
17. I don't believe in a work environment where women are expected to act out in a sexual manner in order to please clients, co-workers, or the boss.
18. I don't believe in making any sexual advances towards a woman unless I'm married to her.
19. I don't believe in supporting the sex industry.
20. I don't believe any woman deserves to get raped or sexually assaulted, not even by her husband.
21. I don't believe any kind of physical or psychological abuse against women is acceptable or even a trivial matter.
22. I don't believe government has an inherent right to tell women what to do with their reproductive organs.
23. I don't believe past generations necessarily hold the secret to resolving the problems that face men and women today.
Now the bad news:
I still believe the Bible delegates the oversight of the local church and the home to men. I still believe that only men are allowed to teach in the worship assemblies of churches. I still think churches have sold out to woman-firsterism. I still believe that anti-male sexism is serious problem in our society (including government's tyranny against men and the demonization of male heterosexuality by leftists and rightists alike). I still believe that marriage has become a liability for men. I still believe men don't need women to the degree that many people think. I still believe that many women are not marriage material and that many of them are single to due their demeaning attitudes towards men and their arrogant sense of entitlement. I still believe many women have succumbed to Nanny-Statism. I still believe that society panders to the worst in women. I still believe feminism is evil. I still believe that abortion is murder and should be outlawed. I still believe in speaking my views about these matters unapologetically. In essence, I ask you to think before you pigeonhole me.
Well, that's what she calls herself, anyway. She has found my blog via this post. Of course, she couldn't let it go--she offered her own commentary on her LiveJournal space (which, like many feminist blogs, does not have a very open commenting policy). Let's look at some of the things she said. My original comments are posted, followed by her replies, and then by my rejoinders.
---- I said: If you are woman, and if you want both genders to be treated with equal dignity in our society, then stop calling yourself a "feminist".
The feminist:"Yeah, because obviously this guy is the sole and final authority on what feminism is and isn't."
My reply: Are feminists the sole and final authority on determining what equality is? ---- I said: Feminism is best defined as a political ideology that concerns itself with the advancement of women. Period. Nothing else.
The feminist: "Wait. Is there something wrong with the advancement of women? Did I miss something here?"
My reply: Yes, in fact, you did miss something (or rather, you left it out--conveniently). It's the next couple of sentences in the paragraph you quoted. I actually said: "Yet, even in defining the word, we must take into consideration how feminism is widely practiced. All too often, feminism promotes women at the expense of other human beings (men and children). Inasmuch as feminists have repeatedly failed to rectify this situation, they no longer deserve any modicum of respect."
Puts a different spin on my words, doesn't it? But, alas, I am not surprised to find myself misrepresented by a feminist. ---- I said: I put feminism on the same level as child pornography.
The feminist:"Hey, I always said that believing that women are people to is exactly the same thing as sexually abusing children!"
My reply: Actually, if you substitute the word "men" for "women" in your sentence, I think you might have an apt description of how feminists feel about men. Anyway, the feminist once again left off the context of my original statement, which reads: "I put feminism on the same level as child pornography. Are you taken aback at that statement? Ask yourself this: Is the murder of innocent children better than the sexual abuse of them? Feminism is most assuredly responsible for the death of millions of babies. Not only that, it is also responsible for creating a debased culture where men and boys are routinely and systematically dehumanized."
Of course, the feminist exclaims that she won't "dignify" my statement. I wonder if she dignifies this t-shirt (which, of course, dignifies this). Ah, yes, feminism. The radical notion that "women are people" ... unless they are still in their mothers' wombs. I guess the sex-selective abortions that occur in third-world countries must cause the feminists no small amount of grief. Because the babies are human? No. Because they are female. So, gender trumps the humanity of a person, right? But wait, I thought feminism was about remedying that! ---- I said: The moment you call yourself a feminist is the moment I have stopped taking you seriously. Why? Because you have never taken seriously the concerns of men.
The feminist:"I keep forgetting, it's the duty of feminists to put aside their trivial concerns about the welfare of women and see to men's needs. Silly me!"
My reply: I am not surprised at your response. The priceless logic of the quintessential feminist: "Why should I take the concerns of men seriously? They're the oppressors! Oh, by the way, women's issues are everyone's issues! Men can benefit from feminism! Why don't they take us more seriously?!"
Whenever you visit the websites of religious "relationship experts" and other such pundits, do you feel a disconnect between what you affirm and what they affirm? Are you confused by what they say, given that they claim to speak for believers such as yourself? Never fear! Your days of frustration are over! I hereby present the Estrogelical Glossary, a handy guide to the lingo others use when talking about "biblical manhood."
accountability (n): (1) A church ministry designed to assist men in overcoming their sexuality. (2) A similar ministry designed to help people that might otherwise think for themselves.
beauty (n): (1) A quality that man are commanded by the church to see only internally in women. (2) A quality women see only externally with each other.
biblical (adj): Traditional.
call (v): To demand another believer do something (Note: Always used in the passive voice as an auxiliary verb - e.g., "Men are called to be providers" as opposed to "I call men to be providers."). children (n): (1) A plurality of small human beings that are an unqualified blessing between a minimum quantity of two and a maximum quantity of whatever number a religious pundit feels like siring himself. (2) A fashion accessory for Christian women.
Christian: (1) (adj) Culturally reactionary. (2) (n) One who agrees with the theology of the lecturers for T4G.
church (n): (1) A building with a beautiful, commodious auditorium. (2) A civic club that uses hymn books (not to be confused with a local fellowship of believers who have all things in common and bear one another's burdens).
conservative (adj): Fashionably authoritarian.
counter-cultural (adj): A quality ascribed to customs and traditions in order to present them as being biblical and trendy, when in fact, they are neither.
courtship (n): (euphemism) (see dating)
dating (n): Something between lust and fornication. (see also courtship)
defraud (v): The act of just wanting to be friends with a woman.
discernment (n): The degree of scrupulosity bound on others that one is willing to personally adopt himself.
DTR (n): Short for "defining the relationship" (also "dudes tolerating rejection").
family: (1) (n) A mother, father, and two or more children (contrast with a widow and two children, a couple with one child, etc.). (2) (n) The "basic unit of society," contrasted with single people who are not a part of society. (3) (adj) Religiously conservative ("family values," "family bookstore," or "family activities").
feel (v): The female alternative to knowing.
husbands (n): A male indentured servant.
initiate (v): Exercising the prerogative of doing something constructive or meaningful about a relationship (e.g., "Real men initiate and women don’t!").
intentional (n): Purposefully compliant.
leadership (n): (1) The act of making decisions that are a part of adulthood but are not particularly pleasant ("Men are called to leadership, not women!"). (2) A collectivity of religious individuals who "lead" primarily in ways other than by example ("Trust your leadership in your church!").
lust (n): Showing even the slightest bit of heterosexual interest in the opposite sex, chiefly when men are interested in women.
man (n): A recovering pervert.
manly (adj.) : Acting like a jock, but religious.
marriage (n): Church-approved relationship wherein women exchange sex for financial support, not to be confused with prostitution, a practice that is sinful and demeaning to women.
mature (adj): Thoroughly indoctrinated.
ministry (n): An enterprise which involves dispensing platitudes, dictums, and non-expertise for profit.
morality (n): Responsible and ethical behavior regarded solely in terms of sexuality.
pastor (n): (euphemism) (see preacher)
pornography (n): A type of media that presents an unrealistic and demeaning view of the opposite sex (not to be confused with romance novels and anything relationship experts write about men).
preacher (n): A person in the habit of complaining about other believers who nonetheless gets paid for it.
protector (n): A man who engages in stereotypically masculine acts of aggressiveness and stoicism, even though the woman in his company is most likely not in immediate danger of anything substantive.
provider (n): The one who makes the larger paycheck ("Women are not called to be providers for their families because they are not supposed to provide anything!").
purity (n): Restraint from all indications of being heterosexual prior to marriage.
real men (n): Men who comply with one's demands.
self: (n): One's welfare (always to be denied for the sake of others who have a low opinion of it).
sex (n): A reward dispensed to a male pet who obeys his owner.
sin (n) (1) Archaic: A transgression of God's law. (2) Doing whatever a religious writer doesn't like.
singleness (n): The status of being alone and lonely--a tragedy for women, but a sin for men.
submit (v): The graciousness of a woman shown in her acceptance of whatever preferential treatment a man gives her.
wife (n): A career woman with a retirement plan.
woman (n): A asexual, angelic being who likes children and money.
worldview (n): A coherent system of wrong-headed ideas ("We need to develop a worldview to counter that of our secular culture.").
worldly (adj) (synonym for secular): Akin to whatever non-religious people embrace, whether it makes perfect sense or not.
Last week, I came across a wonderful post by Elusive Wapiti on his blog. The piece, "Providing His Way Into Oblivion" is a much needed corrective to the mind-numbing insistence that so many religious leaders have in presenting manhood primarily in terms of economic potential (i.e., men as walking ATMs). But there's another post on the same subject by Elusive Wapiti that I treasure just as much, if not more: "The Church's Own Teachings Create Broken Homes." It's one of those articles that I feel a burden on my heart to write but am glad when somebody does it for me. I am certainly adding it to the "Biblical Manhood Library." I'm also adding EW to my blogroll under the "Notable Kindred" category (religious, against male-bashing and against statism).
This is a blog about "biblical manhood." I am not here to give Bible-believing men a list of do's and don'ts. Plenty of others already make a living doing that. My intention is provide a scriptural response to anti-male sexism. My intention is to proclaim the truth to the status quo and defend those who have been denied a voice for far too long. In this, I believe I am following the example of my Lord and Savior.