|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Are Protestant denominations too girly?
|
GoodCatholicLad
Shipmate
# 9231
|
Posted
I ran across this topic on craigslist.org and thought it was too funny.
Authotr contends that churches neglect men
perhaps if they wanted to attract more men maybe dark panneling, large plasma TV?
[Thread title edited for Limbo.]
[ 08. February 2006, 19:24: Message edited by: RuthW ]
--------------------
All you have is right now.
Posts: 1234 | From: San Francisco California | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266
|
Posted
What I have seen it is that all churches are too girly unless they also bound up with a particular culture in a foreign place. So an Anglican church in Germany was men and women in equal proportions and in the UK a Greek Orthodox church was 50, 50.
--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp
Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I'm suspicious about the numbers. The article mentions that men make up only 40% of some denominations (I think -- 40% of exactly what wasn't exactly clear), and further that a lot of the churchgoers are older women.
Um, don't women tend to outlive men? If the congo is primarly older people, you would expect more women than men.
I'd like to see some more nuanced studies and polls.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
There is good statistical information to be found in Dr Peter Brierley's book "The Tide is Running Out" - but it relates to the church in the UK. I know of no equivalent in the US.
From memory (my copy is out on loan), the 60/40 percentage is consistent with Dr Brierley's findings. The book also includes information about attendance by age, denomination Uk region etc. I've tried to find some online extracts from the book, so far without success - but others are welcome to try.
I agree with Mousethief - the statistic is far too general to provide helpful information about the means of proclamation. We need to do some hard work to understand trends and their significance, rather than jumping to conclusions on the basis of a headline statistic. I haven't read David Murrow's book, but on the basis of the "blurb" I doubt whether it is a very balanced or helpful view.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Birdseye
I can see my house from here!
# 5280
|
Posted
Considering the number of elderly widows at church, I'm inclined to think it IS a matter of men dying sooner.
--------------------
Life is what happens whilst you're busy making other plans.
a birdseye view
Posts: 1615 | From: West Yorkshire | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tabby Cat
Shipmate
# 4561
|
Posted
We had a discussion about this not long ago, I think. With a few accusations of sexism flying around...
Things like this do make me a bit annoyed (from the OP article):
quote:
One of his success stories concerns a church that changed the decor of its prayer room. It replaced lavender paint and lace curtains with a spiritual warfare theme, using swords, shields and tomahawks as art.
[...]
Mr. Murrow believes churches are designed for the older women who fill their pews, so they emphasize comfort and security. But men want to hear about challenge, risk, change and reward.
![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
But the article is quite interesting and worth reading to the end. Apparently
quote:
Concerns about the feminization of church have arisen cyclically since the Victorian era, says Stephen Prothero, chairman of the religion department at Boston University.
Anybody know anything about this?
Posts: 1063 | From: Paddling at the edge of the sea | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
And "girly" ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
It's that stupid idea that only men are tough and feisty and only women are carers. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
There are a lot of young men (proportionally) at our church - and of course, a bunch of elderly surviving women!
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
I don't agree with every word he has written, but I think there is an awful lot of truth in the observations and analysis.
Gender imbalance in UK churches is not just women's greater life expectancy, it is 60:40 in all adult age groups.
Most churches do have more ministries with a traditional feminine bias. For many churches this is a serious problem and it needs to be addressed.
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
It's a topic that has merit in my opinion. And it's a growing concern - as well as the website of the guy who wrtote that article, there's Geezers for Jesus which was set up recently to look at this very issue.
quote:
"We like to talk about nurturing things, about giving something care, and tending it, and making it grow as a flower would," he says. Outside the church, he says, no one would approach a man and say, "Would you come over here and help me nurture something?"
Mr. Murrow believes churches are designed for the older women who fill their pews, so they emphasize comfort and security. But men want to hear about challenge, risk, change and reward.
This is quite accurate IMHO. The language used in church is very feminine...
quote:
According to Mr. Murrow, the church abounds in feminine language about Jesus. He is meek and mild, with long flowing hair, and he is often described as "beautiful." Popular hymns speak of walking with him in a rose garden, listening to his "sweet" voice.
Yep, the dude's definitely got a point. How girlie is that?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jonathan the Free:
...it is 60:40 in all adult age groups.
I doubt this very, very, very much. The odds are astronomically against it, particularly given the elderly widow issue already raised. Do you have any sources for this claim?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matrix
Shipmate
# 3452
|
Posted
From an article I recently wrote:
Sitting with a friend drinking coffee, my heart sank as I heard another variation on what had become a familiar complaint; “Don’t get me wrong, I love Jesus, it’s just the church I can’t stand. It’s not a place that I belong.” It seems I’ve had a few conversations like this and all of them with guys who I know have come into some kind of relationship with Jesus, and so I’ve been thinking a lot recently about the role of men in the church.
As I look around the church I see that there are often nearly twice as many women as men, and the common reason I hear for this seems to be that somehow women are more spiritual than men. I wonder if that’s true, and I wonder if the problem is that church fits women better because it is shaped around a feminine spirituality. I’m coming to the conclusion we need to learn how to express masculine spirituality too.
In the eyes of many men I speak to, church seems primarily geared up for women. I think it’s to the church’s credit that in a world that has neglected and undervalued women’s opinions and work we have created an environment that reflects so well feminine spirituality, something I’d characterize as having a strong emphasis on nurture, care, relationships, love and beauty, all things that are celebrated and encouraged in church life.
We sing our love songs to Jesus, place nice flowers around to brighten the buildings up, and run mid-week programmes that are designed to facilitate support, care and nurture. This is all good, and I would hate to see any of it stop, but it seems to have got a bit unbalanced. All this fits the feminine side of us well, but what is there for the masculine part of our character, the part that men especially need to have ministered to? We’re good at expressing feminine spirituality, but what about masculine spirituality?
What the Church needs is a balance of both the masculine and the feminine, and I deliberately use the term masculine as opposed to male, because I think that to some extent we all have a blend of what could be described as masculine and feminine characteristics. Just as much of what we do now reflects our feminine side, there are activities and approaches that would be more masculine.
I think that there are a number of factors also that make it more important that the church thinks about the subject of a masculine spirituality. With the evolving role of sexes many men find themselves adrift in an ocean they don’t understand, with the traditional, familiar landmarks missing. There has been a change in the role models for men that has become confusing for some, with men who describe themselves as “metrosexual” like David Beckham being held up, and traditional role models frowned upon. Whatever the judgment about the rightness or otherwise of this, men are struggling to know their place in a changing world and church.
So, a masculine spirituality, what could it look like? Well, it might be a spirituality that has an emphasis towards action rather than dry theorising. It is likely to be involved at the conflict end of the Church’s mission to the world.
People who prefer masculine spirituality would find inspiration in Jesus’ words about laying hold of the kingdom with violence. This speaks to them of the direct action that is needed to oppose social injustice, expose abuse and hypocrisy, and to fight for the rights of the downtrodden.
A masculine spirituality is likely to work out its theology by a process of argument and discussion based on concrete experience rather than contemplation and reflection. A church that was serious about encouraging masculine spirituality might need to ask whether traditional preaching works. Asking men to sit and listen to a lecture without giving an opportunity for reaction, questioning and the sharing of an alternative viewpoint encourages passivity, not something one equates with masculinity.
Men I speak too often seem to be looking for a place that has an emphasis on brotherhood and loyalty, a place where they can share true accountability and enjoy lively friendship. Geezers for Jesus phrases it this way “It’s ok to be serious about God and still enjoy fast cars, beer, football and curry”. A faith that works in the realities of everyday life, rather than a faith that works on Sundays only seems to be needed.
Another fundamental difference would be the way that we understand Jesus. Far from the image conjured up by many “Jesus is my boyfriend” type songs, the masculine approach to Jesus may be to see Him as a man who didn’t shy from conflict with those he disagreed with, who was clear about his mission, took care of the downtrodden, and didn’t flinch from a violent end.
I wonder how different church would be, how many fewer of those desperate conversations I’d have, and how fuller an expression of the kingdom we’d see if were able to find the right balance.
Regards
M
--------------------
Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place. - Garden State
Posts: 3847 | From: The courts of the King | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tabby Cat
Shipmate
# 4561
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matrix:
What the Church needs is a balance of both the masculine and the feminine, and I deliberately use the term masculine as opposed to male, because I think that to some extent we all have a blend of what could be described as masculine and feminine characteristics. Just as much of what we do now reflects our feminine side, there are activities and approaches that would be more masculine.
Maybe I'm just a raving feminist, but I wish you wouldn't use the words masculine and feminine in this context either. It can't help but sound like manliness and womanliness.
I suppose I just don't believe I have a feminine side and a masculine side. I don't believe I'm being feminine when I'm thinking loving thoughts and masculine when I run around killing things in a role-playing game. And as I said in the last thread, my boyfriend is in no way being feminine when he tells me how much he loves me.
If those words weren't used, I'd probably agree with most of your article, Matrix. But that probably sounds like politically correct censorship or something ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posts: 1063 | From: Paddling at the edge of the sea | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matrix:
What the Church needs is a balance of both the masculine and the feminine, and I deliberately use the term masculine as opposed to male, because I think that to some extent we all have a blend of what could be described as masculine and feminine characteristics. Just as much of what we do now reflects our feminine side, there are activities and approaches that would be more masculine.
I sort-of agree, but why bother with the masculine / feminine distinction at all? Yes, the Church needs to emphasise both "caring" and "conflict", but ISTM associating one with femininity and one with masculinity is a needless generalisation.
[Bah! Cross-post with Tabby.Cat, who said it better.]
[ 22. December 2005, 08:39: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
In my experience, conservative evangelical churches are much nearer 50/50 than most of the rest are.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quantpole
Shipmate
# 8401
|
Posted
What words could you use instead to get the same point across?
[cross-posted with everyone - replying to tabby.cat
[ 22. December 2005, 08:44: Message edited by: quantpole ]
Posts: 885 | From: Leeds | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicodemia
WYSIWYG
# 4756
|
Posted
The only church I've been in that had a 50/50 congo was one that preached "fighting talk" and challenges. It also had a male music group that was very "in yer face"! (Especially the drummer ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) )
There were very, very few elderly - men or women, it was very family orientated.
Posts: 4544 | From: not too far from Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tabby Cat
Shipmate
# 4561
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quantpole:
What words could you use instead to get the same point across?
Well, perhaps Matrix and others wouldn't see it as the same point, but to me his article would have made more sense with the references to masculinity and femininity just taken out! No need to replace them, just "here are some aspects of spirituality that need to be played up a bit - I think they will attract more people."
Posts: 1063 | From: Paddling at the edge of the sea | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tabby.Cat:
Well, perhaps Matrix and others wouldn't see it as the same point, but to me his article would have made more sense with the references to masculinity and femininity just taken out! No need to replace them, just "here are some aspects of spirituality that need to be played up a bit - I think they will attract more people."
I agree with this.
I'm very interested in why the gender balance in church is the way it is. But I get uncomfortable with the gender stereotypes. As a woman, for instance, I'm not interested in "dry theorising" either and I don't really like having that stereotype pushed onto me.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
I see what you are saying, Tabby.Cat. But it sort of sidesteps the issue of where the men aren't and why not. I think the issue you raise is probably more to do with making archetypes into stereotypes, and none of us fit stereotypes. It's a pointless activity. But then so is decrying archetypes if they convey something.
Yes we have discussed this several times. I'm not sure the other times have been archived, but IIRC there are some quite detailed statistics available, though I don't have them to hand. Ken may well be your man for the UK stats. I have a feeling that in the UK, baptist churches managed closest to the 50/50, others were more biased towards female predominance. 60/40 gets quoted quite often. There are figures analyzing the ratio by age class and I'm pretty sure that the predominance is independent of that, i.e. if you strip out the oldest age classes, there is still a predominance of women.
But I'm quoting from memory here. I'll see if I can find the figures.
Ian
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Birdseye
I can see my house from here!
# 5280
|
Posted
Our church is CofE its just off a quayside, an old stone building with wooden pillars and a display of flags hung from the balcony, it reminds me much more of a ship than of a girly room or a male lodge -it does have some wonderful cross-stitch kneelers but the paint is blue and gold and the feeling is far from fluffy.
The songs we sing speak both of how wonderful Jesus is, and of God as armour and weaponry. We have women's fellowship and men's breakfasts, but there are still a few more women than there are men because we have a lot of elderly people, and their husbands die first.
I don't think I've ever come across a church that was particularly masculine or feminine and I don't think I understand how one could exist... is this something to do with an old-fashioned view that men can't express emotions, or that pacifism is sissy?
Christianity is sissy if you want to believe that showing emotion, love and kindness, charity-work and worship are sissy... but that kind of shallow misunderstanding of life leads to little boys stealing cars to impress their mates; kids getting drunk to show how 'hard' they are and people starting fights to prove they're not chicken... there is nothing noble or honourable about being aggressive or violent; or wielding whatever power you have destructively...
--------------------
Life is what happens whilst you're busy making other plans.
a birdseye view
Posts: 1615 | From: West Yorkshire | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
I don't think it's about that so much Birdseye, but your last paragraph may have touched on the opposite side of the issue.
Ian
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
As a bloke (last time I checked which was in the shower this morning), it really depends on what sort of mood I'm in as to whether I enjoy church (that raises the whole other issue as to what extent church exists for our enjoyment and entertainment): if I've had a hard week and am feeling down and threatened, then I tend to embrace, or let myself be embraced by, the caring, sharing, nurturing, comforting nature of the service and surroundings; if I'm more full of life, the I would prefer a more 'theological debate style' approach to preaching, something a but more punchy and aggressive even.
Whatever mood I'm in though, I really can't stand singing 'Jesus is my boyfriend' worship songs and I wish we didn't have them
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
I wonder whether its more that some women put up with crap longer than men, rather than it being geared to woman. I take exception to quite a lot of matrix's points actually.
quote:
Originally posted by Matrix:
From an article I recently wrote:
“Don’t get me wrong, I love Jesus, it’s just the church I can’t stand. It’s not a place that I belong.”
This is something thats happening amongst men *and* women - something groups like "emergent" (gah i hate all the pomo lingo) and co are trying to address. Tons of people, men and women are leaving churches - aka "churchless faith" and all that. Just cos you regularly speak to men, doesnt mean its equally a "womans" point.
I do agree that a lot of churches are geared towards family, but this alienates the single woman as much as macho men.
I do agree that men are questioning identity, what it means to be a "man" etc, although isnt this true of christians and non-christians?
quote:
So, a masculine spirituality, what could it look like? Well, it might be a spirituality that has an emphasis towards action rather than dry theorising.
Its mainly **women** doing dry theorizing? if anything Id have thought it was often the other way around - look at the stupidly high proportion of male accademics, male preachers, etc (Im unusual in that im a woman who would love to study more theology)
quote:
A church that was serious about encouraging masculine spirituality might need to ask whether traditional preaching works.
Just remove the word "masculine" from that sentance and youd be fine.... Ive regularly questioned the fact that hours and hours go into a sermon that very few people remember, and really doesnt impact that many. Just because theres women in church it doesnt logically follow they like the sermons. Perhaps they are there to connect with others?
quote:
Asking men to sit and listen to a lecture without giving an opportunity for reaction, questioning and the sharing of an alternative viewpoint encourages passivity, not something one equates with masculinity.
Again - this is blatant sexism. Youre saying women are passive? Sitting and listening to a lecture is something ive not really managed, and as a teacher is something i never do - its about learning styles.... not men/women.
quote:
Geezers for Jesus phrases it this way “It’s ok to be serious about God and still enjoy fast cars, beer, football and curry”.
Fab - one thing i can agree with! but youre mistakingly equating that with questions of theology and practice. I *so* believe men and women are different in many ways, and having "lads time" is a good thing. But to say women are passive, unthinking, but also dry theologians is really odd.
It seems to me youve taken all you dont like about church and lumped it together as "feminine".ANy issues there??!!
(hmmm better coding?)
[ 22. December 2005, 09:31: Message edited by: Emma. ]
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Telepath
Ship's Steamer Trunk
# 3534
|
Posted
Originally posted by IanB:
quote:
I see what you are saying, Tabby.Cat. But it sort of sidesteps the issue of where the men aren't and why not.
Yeah - but the reason why I agree with Tabby.Cat is that framing certain activities as 'masculine' or 'feminine' ITSELF sidesteps the issue of where the men aren't and why not.
How do we know that women aren't also going at some of the stuff that happens at their churches, but just putting up with it anyway (for example)? How do we know that men are staying away from church at all without a better citation, and if that's true, how do we know that it's because church is too pastel and frilly for them?
What would help is a real and solid study of reasons men and women give as to why they go to church or stay away.
--------------------
Take emptiness and lying speech far from me, and do not give me poverty or wealth. Give me a living sufficient for me.
Posts: 3509 | From: East Anglia | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
strathclydezero
# 180
|
Posted
I've heard Callum Brown argue that churches are better attended by females than males because females are more likely to be the family maker. And subscribing to communities, especially communities which teach "family values", gives the mother of the family at worst a chance to learn effective ways to influence her family, and at best her family might join her in the community.
And then there's also the argument that Billy Graham was a sex god. And it was he who filled the churches in the 50s.
--------------------
All religions will pass, but this will remain:
simply sitting in a chair and looking in the distance.
V V Rozanov
Posts: 3276 | From: The Near East | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Na, quite the reverse.
Protestant men, having fire in their blood, are just as likely to be out watching or playing football as to be sitting in church.
Non-protestants are the girly ones as they just sit meekly in their seats.
C
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Birdseye:
Christianity is sissy if you want to believe that showing emotion, love and kindness, charity-work and worship are sissy... but that kind of shallow misunderstanding of life leads to little boys stealing cars to impress their mates; kids getting drunk to show how 'hard' they are and people starting fights to prove they're not chicken...
But that's the culture a heck of a lot of us live in. You call it a shallow misunderstanding, but that's because you're not part of that culture.
For a lot of us it is bad to be a coward, or a weakling, or a sissy. Often the three go together, so showing signs of one is automatically a sign of the others. And Christianity is percieved as a very sissy thing, mostly because of all the "don't fight back" and "be meek, mild and submissive" stuff that is seen coming out of it...
quote:
there is nothing noble or honourable about being aggressive or violent; or wielding whatever power you have destructively...
Again, you're only saying that because you're not connected to that culture. There is honour in violence - the honour that comes from being able to defend yourself.
I think the word we're all skirting round here is "macho". It's a desirable trait for men to have, but it seems pretty incompatible with a great deal of Christianity (those wrestling dudes notwithstanding - now there's masculine spirituality!!!)
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
Following the link the mission statement of this guy's website church for men is worthwhile. I'm currently part of a kind of 'men's ministry' that is being lead by one of our church members. I think the critique of 'traditional' men's ministries things that kind of 'glued on' to real church has some mileage. I'll to be honest and say that our current men's ministry is just that: glued onto church.
However, some of the stuff he says is b*llsh!t.
[ 22. December 2005, 10:23: Message edited by: m.t_tomb ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
That post doesn't make sense. Sorry. And the link doesn't work ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
I'm in full agreement with Tabby.Cat and Emma. on this.
I was reading your article, matrix, and just couldn't identify with the distinctions you were drawing. You readily admit that each of us a blend of the characteristics that you list, and so I wonder what leads to your classification of some of them as masculine and others as feminine.
I felt the same thing when you started the thread about the use of the term "geezer", (which I still have never heard other than in a disrespectful manner by younger people or in a jesting, self-ridiculing manner by elderly men). I visited Geezers for Jesus and just couldn't see what it was about beer, football and fast cars that was specifically masculine. It was just a turn off, to be honest.
I loathe and detest the "Me and my little pony" songs that you mentioned above. My focus is on the majesty of the omnipotent, eternal God, but who condescended in a way best described in the well-known Christmass carol, The Great God of Heaven is come down to earth:
quote:
O wonder of wonders! which none can unfold:
the Ancient of Days is an hour or two old,
the Maker of all things is made of the earth,
man is worshipped by angels, and God comes to birth!
I see that as a result of my Catholic focus on the Incarnation and not as a masculine or feminine trait. Likewise with many other things that do and don't work for me in church.
I also agree with Emma. about what appears to have happened in your article. It seems to the reader that you have categorised things at church into things which do touch your spirituality and things that don't, and then decided that because you are male and consider yourself masculine (to use your preferred terminology), that those things that work for you are masculine and those that don't are feminine. I was about to say that I would classify these things differently, but I started and realised that the masculine-feminine dichotomy just doesn't work for me at all.
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
I think, Telepath, if you re-read my original post, you will see that I was making exactly the first point that you seem to be making:
quote:
none of us fit stereotypes. It's a pointless activity.
Of course there will be women who are not going to church because of something or other there. In fact there is at least one thread on the go at present that raises some of those issues. The issue here is one of differentials though - why more of one than the other? Does God call women more than men?
Frankly, the "pastel and frilly" thing is a bit of a diversion. I've never been in a church that's pastel and frilly - neither for that matter have I been in one that decorates itself out with the Artillery of God. But other things may be more appropriate to discuss.
Ian
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
From my lesbian perspective -- snort.
I get so sick of this ridiculous "Men Are From Mars, Girls Are From Venus" gender stereotyping.
My church is pretty 50/50 in terms of gender ratio. (Except for the LutheranChik household.) Go figure.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
From my lesbian perspective -- snort.
I get so sick of this ridiculous "Men Are From Mars, Girls Are From Venus" gender stereotyping.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
It's nonsense, isn't it?
There are some traits that some men may have in common, perhaps more so than some women do those particular traits. Then again, some other women may share those very same traits with each other, more so than some other men may.
How do we just decide that a, b & c are masculine but that x, y & z are not? And how can catering for people who display particular traits be said to be catering for people's "masculine" or "feminine" sides?
It's something I'm really struggling to relate to at all.
[ 22. December 2005, 10:58: Message edited by: Back-to-Front ]
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Does anyone like those 'Jesus is my boyfriend' songs, or is it just because I'm a heterosexual male that I hate them (do female and gay shipmates like them, for instance?)?
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chukovsky
Ship's toddler
# 116
|
Posted
From what I've read, the more conservative (whether evangelical or other traditional) the church, the more men attend. My take on this is that where the traditional male-female hierarchy is preserved, men feel more comfortable.
If women in positions of power in the church is what's putting off men, I have to say I'd rather go to an all-female church. Perhaps those men who feel the need for traditional structures could then form their own, all-male church? Except, of course, men-who-feel-the-need-for-traditional-structures would probably also feel the need to tell everyone they were right and represented the One True Church, so then people who didn't go to church would think all Christians were like them, so perhaps that's not such a good plan.
And I'm also with Tabby Cat on feeling very negative towards descriptions of A as masculine and B as feminine. I would prefer to have my actions and inclinations described as human, without some of them being labelled as feminine (and therefore correct, given my gender) and some as masculine (and therefore the opposite). But if people are going to decorate my church with images of war, it's going to put me, personally, off going to church. So perhaps the ratio of males to females would be changed, but because people like me have left.
ETA: Matt, I hate them too - and hated them when I was unmarried and supposed to be viewing Jesus as the love of my life...
[ 22. December 2005, 11:03: Message edited by: chukovsky ]
--------------------
This space left intentionally blank. Do not write on both sides of the paper at once.
Posts: 6842 | From: somewhere else | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think the word we're all skirting round here is "macho". It's a desirable trait for men to have...
Actually, it's a big turn-off.
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chukovsky
Ship's toddler
# 116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Back-to-Front:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think the word we're all skirting round here is "macho". It's a desirable trait for men to have...
Actually, it's a big turn-off.
Vote from a straight female who also thinks it's a turn-off, and I'm sure lots of my straight female friends would agree.
--------------------
This space left intentionally blank. Do not write on both sides of the paper at once.
Posts: 6842 | From: somewhere else | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Does anyone like those 'Jesus is my boyfriend' songs, or is it just because I'm a heterosexual male that I hate them (do female and gay shipmates like them, for instance?)?
I'm not sure it's a matter of sexuality, but simply taste. Some people have it; some people don't.
This gay shipmate can't stand them.
ETA that I'm glad Chukovsky agrees. I didn't make clear that I was meaning it's a turn off in a wider sense than as a prospective partner, but also in prospective friends and social acquaintances. Just thinking about the one person I really couldn't stand at a former place of work, he was someone who felt the need to show he was angry by putting on the "angry face" and storming out. He would aggressively challenge people who had upset him, without trying to ascertain first whether he had understood correctly (which often, he hadn't) because to do otherwise would make him appear weak. This made him an unattractive person, and not many people got on with him, I'm guessing, as a result.
[ 22. December 2005, 11:10: Message edited by: Back-to-Front ]
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quantpole
Shipmate
# 8401
|
Posted
In general more women attend church than men. In general men have characteristics different to women (e.g. when men meet up it tends to involve actively doing something - playing sport, drinking at the pub etc - and are less comfortable just going round to someone's house and chatting). This doesn't charicature all men as liking football and women liking sitting around drinking tea, but does mean that at a statistical (rather than individual) level there are differences between the sexes. It is important to recognise this.
However, what it shouldn't mean is that the statistical generalities are applied at an individual level. I've heard of conferences where they've split up for mens and womens socials - the men to play football and women to have a makeover. That, I think, is demeaning to both sexes.
Posts: 885 | From: Leeds | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chukovsky:
quote:
Originally posted by Back-to-Front:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think the word we're all skirting round here is "macho". It's a desirable trait for men to have...
Actually, it's a big turn-off.
Vote from a straight female who also thinks it's a turn-off, and I'm sure lots of my straight female friends would agree.
Well there seems to be a fairly large market for it round where I live, especially among the younger folk.
I'm wondering if the reason these views aren't popularly held on the Ship is because the Ship is mostly made up of regularly-churchgoing Christians, the group one would most expect to not share them if it's true that church is an inherently "girly" place. The group that may be inadvertantly selecting against those who hold to traditional ideas of what being "manly" is about (and no, that doesn't have to include the subjugation of women, before you even start).
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
quote:
Does anyone like those 'Jesus is my boyfriend' songs, or is it just because I'm a heterosexual male that I hate them (do female and gay shipmates like them, for instance?)?
No, I detest them as well -- not only the contemporary ones but the smarmy 19th-century I-come-to-the-garden-alone variety. Our ELCA hymnals avoid them, but we do have a small faction of elderly folk in our church -- people who seem to have come into our church by way of more "Protestant" churches -- who just wuv them; at one point they even self-published a little booklet of them that we pull out a couple of times a year to humor them. And then I go to my happy place and mentally chant a Psalm or something until it's over. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
I should add that, as a gay man, most of whose male friends are straight (I like it that way, honestly ), I am quite sure that being macho, being seen to be defensive and an obsession with avoiding being seen as weak are not synonymous with maleness. Likewise, being emotionally sensitive, mild and willing to allow the other person the last word are not signs of a diminished maleness.
This isn't just about church.
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
I think a lot of this has to do with the cultivated homophobia in a lot of churches. I used to live in close proximity to a family of fundamentalists, and it seemed that every church activity was strictly gender-segregated, with a big emphasis on "being a godly man" vs. "being a godly woman." And, in my college years, I worked in a Christian bookstore -- actually a nice one, run by Anglicans , with a truly catholic assortment of books -- and would constantly be running into fundamentalist books about "biblical manliness" or "biblical womanliness" that were quite comic; I recall one of them warning parents not to have boys tagging after their moms in the kitchen, or have girls helping Dad with chores, lest the children experience "gender confusion" and -- horror of horrors -- turn gay. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) I suppose after listening to this indoctrination week after week members of those churches are going to be absolutely paranoid about preserving their machismo, or the delicate flower of their womanhood, according to their own highly stereotyped (and silly) criteria.
I guess I don't understand the mentality of people who allow, or expect, their churches to natter at them like this, about their sexual identity or anything else. My own faith community treats members like competent adults.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Does anyone like those 'Jesus is my boyfriend' songs, or is it just because I'm a heterosexual male that I hate them (do female and gay shipmates like them, for instance?)?
Blooming stereotypes. Contemporary Christian songs mirror the Psalms. Some are personal, some are corporate, some are praise, some are love songs, some are pleading, some are lament. Though we also sing traditional hymns, the majority of the songs sung at my local church have been written since 1975. In terms of range, depth and variety of expression, they are as various as the traditional hymn books. "Jesus is my boyfriend" has replaced "happy-clappy" as a term of abuse. It really gets my goat. Another "straw man".
Actually I think this whole thread is based on a straw man. Others' reactions against this sort of gender-stereotyping are the same as my own. My local church, which about as non-conservative evangelical as I know, is growing very rapidly, seems to be about 50/50 men and women and is attended by large numbers in their teens and twenties. We're all quite pleased about this but would not claim that it has very much to do with styles of either churchmanship or worship. What seems to have made the big difference has been the consistent application of a vision to help and support the local community, which is quite deprived. Looking for solutions which reinforce gender-stereotyping, or worship-stereotyping, seems to me to be looking in the wrong place for the wrong reasons.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
I suppose after listening to this indoctrination week after week members of those churches are going to be absolutely paranoid about preserving their machismo, or the delicate flower of their womanhood, according to their own highly stereotyped (and silly) criteria.
It ain't just people in churches, it's a lot of the secular world as well. At least for men - you tend not to get so many "delicate flower of womanhood" types these days...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
chukovsky
Ship's toddler
# 116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by chukovsky:
quote:
Originally posted by Back-to-Front:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think the word we're all skirting round here is "macho". It's a desirable trait for men to have...
Actually, it's a big turn-off.
Vote from a straight female who also thinks it's a turn-off, and I'm sure lots of my straight female friends would agree.
Well there seems to be a fairly large market for it round where I live, especially among the younger folk.
I'm wondering if the reason these views aren't popularly held on the Ship is because the Ship is mostly made up of regularly-churchgoing Christians, the group one would most expect to not share them if it's true that church is an inherently "girly" place. The group that may be inadvertantly selecting against those who hold to traditional ideas of what being "manly" is about (and no, that doesn't have to include the subjugation of women, before you even start).
None of my family and only about 1 colleague goes to church, and macho behaviour is not valued in either of those circles.
--------------------
This space left intentionally blank. Do not write on both sides of the paper at once.
Posts: 6842 | From: somewhere else | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Maybe we don't have many Sun-reading, football-obsessed, 15 pints-of-lager and 3 shags of a Friday/Saturday nighters on board which could be the constituency Marvin alludes to. There are stacks of them in Newport alone.
[ 22. December 2005, 12:09: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicodemia
WYSIWYG
# 4756
|
Posted
Quantpole said:
quote:
In general more women attend church than men. In general men have characteristics different to women (e.g. when men meet up it tends to involve actively doing something - playing sport, drinking at the pub etc - and are less comfortable just going round to someone's house and chatting). This doesn't charicature all men as liking football and women liking sitting around drinking tea, but does mean that at a statistical (rather than individual) level there are differences between the sexes. It is important to recognise this.
You mean men drinking in a pub are doing something, whereas women drinking tea in a house are not?? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
More stereotypes, I'm afraid. Which add nothing to a proper discussion of the OP.
Posts: 4544 | From: not too far from Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Barnabas62 wrote quote:
Looking for solutions which reinforce gender-stereotyping, or worship-stereotyping, seems to me to be looking in the wrong place for the wrong reasons.
Precisely. Though there is a certain irony in the fact that all the loud protestations of stereotyping never seem to move on to the next stage - which is actually looking in the right place. Or maybe people don't think there is any problem at all so there's nothing to look for?
Ian
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
[snark on] Well, maybe for the Sharing of the Peace, males feeling defensive about their masculinity can punch each other instead of extending a hand. Yeah! That'll show 'em all I'm a manly man! [snark off]
I'm sorry, but WTF is this mentality all about? I don't get the insecurity.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
