So Sorry, But Not This Time, Amigo

Michael Weiss writes the following regarding websites such as "Eternal Bachelor" and "MGTOW" ...

Web bookmarks no doubt to be shortly followed by “BabyComeBack.com,” “BCWH” (Bros Coexisting With Hos), and “Yes, Dear.” Because who do we think we’re fooling, really? Not Kay Hymowitz, who concludes by acknowledging what most “studies” have found: all Angry Young Men eventually quit the struggle and settle for the safe institution of marriage over the fantasy of zero responsibility (even if it is only in baseball).

I'll tell you who you're fooling, Michael. Yourself. You and the rest of the MSM. True, the "studies" say a lot of men want to marry in theory. But pray tell, what about the actual rates, my friend? Are the number of marriages going up? How about men marrying while they are still young? If there wasn't any smoke, you guys wouldn't be clucking about men in the first place.

Things are different this time around, folks. Yes, in the past there were cranky Benedicks who always found their Beatrices in the end. But the current exodus of men from the commitment scene is no "much ado about nothing."

Let's face it: The norms of our society have eroded. People have become much more mercenary in their dealings with each other. The "Me" Generation never really went away. It just spawned younger, crasser iterations of itself. This has certainly affected how men and women relate to each other. In a culture that dictates that no one can be really trusted and that a person "must look out for #1," did you expect that men would still warm up to the idea of marriage? Why should they as long as society rewards women who engage in unethical behavior?

P.S. My prediction is that Michael Weiss will start a blog detailing his woes in family court before there is ever a movement called BCWH.

Google Search of "Husbands, Love Your Wives"

Over at Boundless, Suzanne Hadley has an article about marriage and singleness. In it, she quotes Ephesians 5:25, the passage about husbands having to love their wives as Christ loved the Church. Suzanne doesn't mention Ephesians 5:22, where women are told to submit to their husbands. Perhaps this is because Suzanne is writing from a single woman's perspective. I don't know. Yet, I still have to wonder: Is it me or does it seem like Ephesians 5:25 has been pounded to death while Ephesians 5:22 goes largely ignored?

Well, I decided to do an experiment. I used certain search terms and then examined the kind of hits I retrieved. Here are some results I find to be noteworthy ...

1. The search term "husbands love your wives" yielded 8 hits at Boundless. The search term "wives submit" yielded 4 hits at Boundless.

2. The search term "husbands love your wives" yielded 65,800 hits on Google. The search term "wives submit" yielded 56,000 hits on Google.

Make of it what you will.

Demographic Arms Race?

Every so often, I come across an article by a cultural conservative about demographics, about who's having the most babies, about who's going taking over the world, etc. Albert Mohler is wont to peddle articles of this sort, as his most recent offering demonstrates. It makes me wonder. Evangelicals are having children, but they are still in a decline. If only the "kingdom work of changing diapers" (to quote Debbie Maken) could solve all our missiological ills.

I also wonder: What if we take away all the Nanny State incentives for getting pregnant? You know--like welfare, EIC, the ability to claim children as dependents for tax exemption purposes, government programs for children (like public education), etc? After all, Mohler doesn't tell you about the Orthodox Jews who are on the dole, or about the so-called "family values" of many of our immigrants.

Anyway, when it comes to the prospect of Christianity being bred out of existence, I am not all that concerned (Daniel 2:44; Mat. 16:18; Heb. 12:28). If some worry-worts were as concerned about evangelism as they were about who is and who is not having babies, I think we could be a lot less anxious about the Mormons or the Muslims moving into the old church building on the street corner.

P.S. Read this article (from a source hardly known for its liberalism) on whether or not we need to "grow".

PC vs the Evangelical Media Establishment

About a month ago, I was listening to a radio broadcast by Albert Mohler which addressed the issue of young people not getting married. I found Mohler's comments, especially his mind-numbingly tendentious anti-male screeds (see 14:04 into the program), to be par for the course for him. But then a caller named "Adam" was put on the air at about 17:50 into the show. I thought the caller sounded familiar, and sure enough, the caller turned out to be none other than our own Puritan Calvinist!

I have to admire PC for his diligence in challenging Albert Mohler's mishandling of the Scriptures. Unfortunately, Mohler's show format evinces the familiar hallmarks of AM talk radio, especially the hazardous slide toward demogogic monologue. In such a format, the nuance and counterarguments of dissenting voices are not likely to be broached in an intellectually substantive manner. And so it was with PC's exchange with Mr. Mohler. PC's exegesis was summarily dismissed by Mohler as being something out of the mainstream (Mohler called it "a very eccentric reading").

PC would like to see some sort of exchange between marriage mandators, on one hand, and those who oppose the marriage mandate (such as himself and myself). Like PC, I also desire to see some sort of a fair, open debate be held with the likes of Steve and Candice Watters, Debbie Maken, Albert Mohler, and others. I don't think it's going to happen, though.

My fear is that the Evangelical Media Establishment (EME), as represented by publishing firms like Crossway and Moody, "family" bookstores, multi-million dollar "ministries" like Focus on the Family, and religious media celebrities like Albert Mohler, does not allow much Lebensraum for criticism. I think this is especially the case for any criticism leveled at the EME that might be both trenchant and biblically sound. We have already seen how the liberal media establishment views people of faith. When people have both an agenda and a microphone, don't expect much airtime for a balanced treatment of the issues at stake.

It's On Amazon

Back in June, Triton said the following about Debbie Maken, her followers, and the Marriage Mandate Movement:

I think the luster is finally wearing off of this silly movement. The Captain hasn't posted since mid-April, and Maken seems to have given up on serious debate, preferring instead to simply insult contrary commenters and pimp her book. I can almost hear the clock ticking on this dying fad, counting down the seconds 'til it joins the ranks of Madballs and Garbage Pail Kids as Things Better Left Uninvented.

Oh, if it were only so, my friend. But alas, as I told you even then ...

I don't think we are out of the woods on this one yet, Triton. I fear that a certain school of thought put forth their feelers with Debbie Maken's book. They got slapped back, but the retreat is temporary. The shadow of the Necromancer has just gone back to the Dark Tower to plot something else. There are plenty of voices out there among religious conservatives that believe a man's duty is to be a Stoic, neo-chivalrous, beast of burden for a feminized, consumeristic culture. Albert Mohler, and others still roam at large, peddling their "Real men do xyz" garbage to a largely female audience of desperate singletons. Mohler sits on CBMW and I notice an old article extolling singleness suddenly goes missing while the Shame-the-Man articles get published on the blog there.

Religious men can't afford to sit out this one. They are being ostracized in our churches. I feel like the lone prophet on my blog, wondering where my fellow 7,000 compadres are at. We need to speak out--in cyberspace on blogs, forums, etc. and in real life. If men don't, then some really stupid anti-male nonsense will get mainstreamed in our "conservative" faith communities. Maken was a wake up call for religious men. Will they sleep on?

Do I exaggerate in saying what I do? Nah. Remember the movie Fireproof? I finally saw it a few weeks ago in the theatre. I admit that it was good for the most part. Amir rightfully complained about the latent headship theology in the plot. But, dear readers, headship theology is not only thing that is disturbing about the ever-so-popular Fireproof Franchise. Yoda says, "If to this link you go, only pain will you find."

The Marriage Mandate nonsense has been mainstreamed. It's only fitting that an answer to it has finally hit Amazon. It is my hope that the disciples of Maken who go there to find their precious tome will see the ensign of doom.