|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Christian manliness
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
For one reason or another I've been exposed to a lot of "Guides to Christian life for men" type books.
The tendency of these to use soldier imagery, I've been feeling that many of these authors would have been much happier with Mithraism* rather than Christianity...
Has Christianity sold out entirely to the idea that men must be soldiers? Or is there stuff out there that has alternatives?
*As interpreted by the Roman legions...
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
S. Bacchus
Shipmate
# 17778
|
Posted
Finding anything on 'manliness', whether Christian or not, that isn't at least vaguely violent/militaristic and also misogynistic, not to mention totally heteronormative and absurdly clichéd, is always an uphill struggle. And, yes, that is a problem.
--------------------
'It's not that simple. I won't have it to be that simple'.
Posts: 260 | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
Finding anything on 'manliness', whether Christian or not, that isn't at least vaguely violent/militaristic and also misogynistic, not to mention totally heteronormative and absurdly clichéd, is always an uphill struggle. And, yes, that is a problem.
Have you read anything about Jesus? If you have, have you really understood it??
eta: applies to the authors Garasu mentions too. Probably to a greater extent.
[ 05. August 2013, 20:32: 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
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
And yet, those authors would claim to be much more biblical than me...
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
S. Bacchus
Shipmate
# 17778
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
Finding anything on 'manliness', whether Christian or not, that isn't at least vaguely violent/militaristic and also misogynistic, not to mention totally heteronormative and absurdly clichéd, is always an uphill struggle. And, yes, that is a problem.
Have you read anything about Jesus? If you have, have you really understood it??
How is that a response to my post? Jesus is a splendid example of humanity, but he's seldom if ever, portrayed as 'manly' in the normal use of that term (and note that I did use the scare around 'manliness' in my original post as well). In fact, I would associate the 'manly' Jesus with the religion of public school chapels in the height of the British Empire, which was definitely part and parcel about what I meant (and also of very dubious relationship to the gospels).
--------------------
'It's not that simple. I won't have it to be that simple'.
Posts: 260 | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
And yet, those authors would claim to be much more biblical than me...
I'm sure they will claim to be more biblical than almost all of us, but I really wonder if they understand Jesus!
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
S Bacchus, totally agreed with you. Although you're probably luckier than the poor women (myself included) who have had to read 'Christian womanhood' type books!
God is neither male nor female, but also both male and female (and genders that are neither male nor female). Women are made in the image of God too. As the fullest expression of God in human form, Jesus undoubtedly has a feminine side to him within His divinity. I don't care for those who craft a female version of Jesus - I don't find it necessary - but Jesus certainly demonstrates what we would think of as 'feminine' personality traits in addition to 'masculine' ones.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
Search 'men' at Augsburg Fortress, then limit it to books. You will get a small selection that seems to be more up your alley.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Wow. What Olaf said.
From the excerpt:
quote:
But sometimes religion also talks about justice; occasionally it even speaks about the justice we men owe women. Still, even when it does that it is usually men giving other men moral advice, with women being spoken about and waiting off stage. When dealing with the heritage of the sacred, and deal with it we will whether we want to or not, we are dealing with both a presence and an absence. For women to become present in the sacred is "to have a say," to become an "I" and a "we" ? no longer the "them" listening off stage. For us men, to search the sacred in our struggle for justice is not to struggle "for them" but to struggle for ourselves, to recover from dishonesty, to hear the unheard male bias in our heritage of worship, and so give clarity to our hearts and what they cling to and rely upon.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
I think those books are written to appeal to very culturally masculine men, the type who are the least likely to be found in church. They're not meant for reflective, caring, liberal-leaning male university graduates. Books for this group of people are less likely to be promoted on the basis of gender, I imagine.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
True, but why shouldn't reflective, caring, liberal, educated, etc, etc men get support from their brothers in arms for being just that? (oh shoot, I just used a military metaphor, didn't I?)
It wasn't always like this-- the idea of "muscular Christianity" didn't really become popular until the early 1800's, at least in the US. Medieval mystics had plenty of praise for the gentle, humble man of God-- indeed, many of the (male)saints were celebrated for their ability to turn away wrath with kindness.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
It wasn't always like this-- the idea of "muscular Christianity" didn't really become popular until the early 1800's, at least in the US.
I read a fascinating book about the rise of 'muscular Christianity' in England. Around 1820 an influential book was written praising 'manliness'. The author used manliness as the opposite of childishness. The idea gradually metamorphosed into the concept that manliness meant masculinity, and especially physical ability. The rest is history.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Has Christianity sold out entirely to the idea that men must be soldiers? Or is there stuff out there that has alternatives?
Your question seems to assume that Christianity is this monolithic, monochromatic thing.
In the U.S. the "Christian-soldier" paradigm is these days almost exclusively a conservative/evangelical thing. It's rare you hear mainline churches like the Episcopalians or the ELCA employ a lot of warrior imagery in songs or sermons or prayers.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Why shouldn't reflective, caring, liberal, educated, etc, etc men get support from their brothers in arms for being just that? (oh shoot, I just used a military metaphor, didn't I?)
It wasn't always like this-- the idea of "muscular Christianity" didn't really become popular until the early 1800's, at least in the US. Medieval mystics had plenty of praise for the gentle, humble man of God-- indeed, many of the (male)saints were celebrated for their ability to turn away wrath with kindness.
I don't think it's a question of 'muscular Christianity'. That was something that was actively promoted by some parts of the church, so I understand, but what we have nowadays is the sort of hyper-masculinity that finds the church fairly alienating.
Still, I'm sure there's a gap in the market for 'In Praise of Mr Nice Guy', or some similarly derivative title, as an attempt to reevaluate and reafffirm the Christian layman as someone caring and reflective.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
I personally really would love it if men of peace really embraced their power and owned it, the same way "promise keepers" and such did. Because such power is ferocious.
I dunno, even in the secular world, it seems like the Age of the Alpha is in its dying throes. The admiration that men like Barack Obama, Jon Stewart, and Reza Aslan receive from people of both genders suggests that the whole chest-beating hyper masculine subculture that tries to dominate is getting old, even to men.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Pulled from another thread, because it fits here.)
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
What IS sexist is the relentless drive for divine femininity or at best androgyny, as if masculinity is a bad thing or something which needs to be controlled, augmented and amended.
Nope. Masculinity itself is not the problem, it is how it has been defined.
Think about the "Fruits of the Spirit" and ask yourself honestly-- how many of those would be culturally labeled "girly"?
Kindness, gentleness, forgiveness-- nurturing elements, right? and, according to machismo rhetoric, who traditionally corners the market on those attributes?(Unfairly-- to the detriment of men's spiritual health , IMO)
That's the problem. Hyper-masculinity divorces men from essential spiritual parts of themselves. Parts that we only seem able to discuss by labeling them "the feminine nature of God."
It's horsecrap. God is God-- God does not need to be gender-classified by us at all. Both men and women need to tap into God to find out what kind of man or woman God wants them to be, and all this cultural pigeonhole nonsense gets in the way of that.
[ 06. August 2013, 00:36: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
It wasn't always like this-- the idea of "muscular Christianity" didn't really become popular until the early 1800's, at least in the US.
I read a fascinating book about the rise of 'muscular Christianity' in England. Around 1820 an influential book was written praising 'manliness'. The author used manliness as the opposite of childishness. The idea gradually metamorphosed into the concept that manliness meant masculinity, and especially physical ability. The rest is history.
Here, here! The language fails us. What are we going to say now, Adultly?
Further, the Christian idea of virtue (from the Latin, vir, man) is the fulfillment of our end as humans, as men and women, as men, walking the idioms backward.
To be manly for a human is to be virtuous. It's got nothing primarily to do with gender. This language equivalence of manly-equals-virtuous is easier to make work for an audience of men, but I've not been afraid to use it with an audience of women..
While we're at, to be vicious is to be full of vice.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Pulled from another thread, because it fits here.
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
What IS sexist is the relentless drive for divine femininity or at best androgyny, as if masculinity is a bad thing or something which needs to be controlled, augmented and amended.
Nope. Masculinity itself is not the problem, it is how it has been defined.
I wish we had a link to daronmedway's original post, because I don't want to unfairly respond to it by gainsaying Kelly Alves's post.
But, on the surface of things I disagree vigorously. It's not a question of definition; it's a question of action.
And, the actions of men—as manifested in rape, in denying girls and women education and political and social voice, in social apartheid, in economic oppression—are a grievous and continuing problem.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
It's not that I don't' agree those things are a problem, it's that reinforcing the idea that those things are an expression of masculinity-- MUCH evidence to the contrary-- not only insults men, but reinforces the idea that engaging in such actions prove one's masculinity. It's unhelpful on several levels.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
It's not that I don't' agree those things are a problem, it's that reinforcing the idea that those things are an expression of masculinity-- MUCH evidence to the contrary-- not only insults men, but reinforces the idea that engaging in such actions prove one's masculinity. It's unhelpful on several levels.
Perhaps you would wish that the expression of masculinity was of some ideal type of virtue. But, the facts show otherwise.
Masculine to have any sensible meaning must be those qualities associated with men.
Men perpetrate rape, they initiate war, they subject women to sexual apartheid, they conduct the bestial economic activity known as sexual slavery, they deny women economic and educational freedom. The list goes on and on.
Yes there are feminine aspects of, and female actors engaged in, this violence against women, but the overwhelming actors, in both numbers and effects, are men.
Does this insult men? Certainly it should; it should insult us all. I'm sorry if our 1st-world, 21st-century, post-modern sensibilities are disturbed by a gimlet-eyed glimpse of the actual lives of men and women. The evidence is ugly.
We can certainly have a discussion of man's first nature and its embodiment of all the virtues of his creator, made in his image and striving toward fulfilling it. We should all strive toward returning masculine behavior to its original virtuous stamp and imprint.
But, to deny the evil, second nature which characterized masculine behavior, men's behavior, toward women out of some misplaced concern for men's feelings takes the pressure off men.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) The Silent Acolyte
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
Here is one of daronmedway's posts on the other thread -
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I have a very strong wife with higher academic qualifications than I. She has established a highly successful charity focused on the alleviation of suffering, poverty and distress leading to relational and familial breakdown. She is a qualified social worker with experience in child protection. She also happens to hold a complementarian view of ministry in the church in her own right on the basis of her understanding of Scripture. She would be similarly dismissive of your effeminate god, so no, it's not sexist. It's biblical.
My question still remains, why would you (both) see 'girly' and 'effeminate' as insults? In fact, you seem to equate feminine with childish and manly with grown up.
If you are looking for a 'biblical' God you will find any kind of God you wish - they are all there in the Bible, including one who dashes babies against stones.
<edited typo>
[ 06. August 2013, 07:23: Message edited by: Boogie ]
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Haydee
Shipmate
# 14734
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think those books are written to appeal to very culturally masculine men, the type who are the least likely to be found in church.
I wish.
We had the wonderful moment last Sunday, after being told all about the strength and godliness of Deborah for Women's Month, where the woman (unusual) preaching then added that Deborah's husband must have been an amazing man to have "allowed" her to be a leader, and that obviously she must have been submissive at home... ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posts: 433 | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
I was using the term girly-god to describe a god who is characterised largely by qualities that appeal to women, not necessarily qualities that typify women.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
Men ... initiate war ...
I mostly agree with you, but beware generalisations. It's entirely possible that women haven't usually initiated war only because they haven't been in a position to do so.
Violence done by women is a growing concern in our culture (or it should be). It seems the old principle is at work: the formerly oppressed, when they become empowered, are under no obligation to be better than their former oppressors.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
And it doesn't help when these amazing soldier-type men of God turn out to be fake. What sort of message does that give?
In the 1970s, though, all the earnest young Christian men wore beards and were rather wet. Perhaps someone decided they needed manning up just a little?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I was using the term girly-god to describe a god who is characterised largely by qualities that appeal to women, not necessarily qualities that typify women.
I'm not sure that that isn't a case of continuing to dig when in a hole.
What is wrong with qualities which appeal to women? What are those qualities you refer to? You are continuing to use girly as an insult without explaining why. (Funny how boy-ey isn't an equivalent insult, doesn't exist. One has to retreat to Latin, where there isn't a female equivalent to puerile. Odd that.)
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
would love to belong
Shipmate
# 16747
|
Posted
Isn't "lad" and "ladism" the male equivalent of girley? Not sure if there is an adjective though.
Posts: 331 | From: Lost and confused | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
I've been reading the wrath thread and realise where this is coming from, and a hypothetical image is coming to me. If I fell in the street (has happened), would I welcome the approach of a Girl Guide with a first aid badge on her sleeve?
It occurs to me that the qualities generally characterised as girly are the product of marketing and the projection of masculine ideas of femininity, rather than intrinsic properties of the female. A bit like Athenian men depriving women of education and then criticising them for not knowing anything worth talking about.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
There's nothing wrong with the qualities that appeal to women so long as they are not emphasised to the detriment of those that appeal to men.
As for the word girly - women use it themselves without any sense of infantilisation or denigration. Usually it's used by women to imply the temporary social exclusion of men - girl's night in/out etc.
So I'm using the term girly-god for the vision of God which overtly asserts - or a best merely implies - the temporary (or even semi-permanent exclusion) of men from the heart of the faith through an overly feminine picture of who God is and what God is like.
[ 06. August 2013, 08:52: Message edited by: daronmedway ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by would love to belong:
Isn't "lad" and "ladism" the male equivalent of girley? Not sure if there is an adjective though.
"Laddish"?
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by would love to belong:
Isn't "lad" and "ladism" the male equivalent of girley? Not sure if there is an adjective though.
It would be laddish - I ran it through my brain, and considered it the grammatical equivalent of girlish, which does not have the same negativity. Boyish is quite attractive. Laddish isn't as negative as it might be, either, despite the "lads' mag" connection. It has a touch of "boys will be boys" about it. There was a pub near my old home called "The lads of the village", which wouldn't have had the name if it meant "the young thugs of the village". (Never went in it, even so.)
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
iamchristianhearmeroar
Shipmate
# 15483
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
There's nothing wrong with the qualities that appeal to women so long as they are not emphasised to the detriment of those that appeal to men.
This is a false dichotomy, or at least a sweeping generalisation, surely? Many of these so-called "qualities that appeal to women" appeal to me, a man.
Should I reevaluate (a) my beliefs, (b) my gender, or (c) both of the above, in view of this?
--------------------
My blog: http://alastairnewman.wordpress.com/
Posts: 642 | From: London, UK | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
There's nothing wrong with the qualities that appeal to women so long as they are not emphasised to the detriment of those that appeal to men.
Please list some of these qualities.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
There's nothing wrong with the qualities that appeal to women so long as they are not emphasised to the detriment of those that appeal to men.
As for the word girly - women use it themselves without any sense of infantilisation or denigration. Usually it's used by women to imply the temporary social exclusion of men - girl's night in/out etc.
So I'm using the term girly-god for the vision of God which overtly asserts - or a best merely implies - the temporary (or even semi-permanent exclusion) of men from the heart of the faith through an overly feminine picture of who God is and what God is like.
I think "girly" is used differently from "girl" as in "girls' night out" (note plural), and I have never heard it without a an implication of childishness.
And, while I appreciate your not liking the implication of exclusion of men from the heart of the faith, could you try extending that perception to understanding a sense of exclusion which has been applied to women over the millenia.
As in:
Women, you are the devil's doorway. You are the gate of Hell...
Woman is a tool of Satan and a pathway to Hell.
Woman is a temple built upon a sewer.
To embrace a woman is to embrace a sack of manure.
When you look upon a woman consider that you face not a human being but the Devil himself, the voice of a woman is the hiss of a snake.
(Tertullian, Thomas Aquinas, Jerome, Pope Boethius, Odo of Cluny, Anthony. (I have omitted the St. in cases where it is usual - they don't seem to have been at their most saintly when making these statements.) Some of these seem to have been retweeting predecessors.)
Those sort of beliefs are much, much worse than implying that God might have a feminine side. Aren't they?
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
Penny S, I haven't said God hasn't got a "feminine side". I've said that an over-emphasis on what appeals to women in the character of God is unhealthy. Essentially, if you take your indignation goggles off you see that I'm saying the same as you but from a male perspective.
Generally, an over-emphasis on what appeals to women tends to create the lenient god of liberal protestantism who has no wrath.. Likewise, an over-emphasis on what appeals to men creates the legalistic god of impersonal judgementalism who can't be loved.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trickydicky
Shipmate
# 16550
|
Posted
There is some stuff out there. Richard Rohr & Joseph Martos 'The Wild Man's Journey'. And, though I am very far away from him theologically, David Murrow 'Why men Hate Going to Church'. It was interesting and has some insight as to why men don't go to church.
We have to work out our own salvation in fear and trembling. In Christ there is no male nor female. Gender stereotyping hurts everyone. My son (now 6 foot 4 and full of muscle) once told me that his English teacher (a woman) was constantly telling them what boys couldn't do (things like emotions, multi-tasking, basically succeed in life!) He is now a reasonably sensitive, warm human being. But he also like to be stretched physically.
--------------------
If something's worth doing, its worth doing badly. (G K Chesterton)
Posts: 57 | From: Greater Manchester | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Don't insult the other men here by claiming your perspective is the "male" one, daronmedway.
[ 06. August 2013, 09:16: Message edited by: Arethosemyfeet ]
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Penny S, I haven't said God hasn't got a "feminine side". I've said that an over-emphasis on what appeals to women in the character of God is unhealthy. Essentially, if you take your indignation goggles off you see that I'm saying the same as you but from a male perspective.
Generally, an over-emphasis on what appeals to women tends to create the lenient god of liberal protestantism who has no wrath.. Likewise, an over-emphasis on what appeals to men creates the legalistic god of impersonal judgementalism who can't be loved.
Have you got any evidence for this? Because it still feels like (to this man at least) one huge stereotype, or set of stereotypes at least.
And writing off a legitimate complaint about the exclusion of women within Christianity over much of its history as "indignation goggles" is at best grossly insensitive and at worse deeply offensive and denying there's ever been a problem.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglo Catholic Relict
Shipmate
# 17213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think those books are written to appeal to very culturally masculine men, the type who are the least likely to be found in church. They're not meant for reflective, caring, liberal-leaning male university graduates. Books for this group of people are less likely to be promoted on the basis of gender, I imagine.
A man who is secure in who he is will be very unlikely to read any such book, imho. They seem more to affirm those who are wavering about the reality of that cultural masculinity.
In a world where most men are beginning to sense that there is a different path possible, and where many are already following it, I think the role of those books is to persuade the waverers to remain on the same well trodden path that their fathers, grandfathers and great grandfathers were forced to walk. The message seems to be, if it was good enough for them, it is good enough for you. Updated with the newest version of the anti-Christ and the Jezebel spirit, but otherwise the same.
Although I ought to add that I have never read such a book in my life; picked them up, read the back cover, fell about laughing.
In the dim and distant I have heard exhortations directed towards men during worship sessions, followed by distinctly different messages towards women. And I have heard men invited to prayer breakfasts, with all sorts of spiritual and familial power offered alongside their corn flakes.
And from the opposite end of the spectrum I have heard a very clear expression of why women don't belong in the sanctuary, over several years. None of it particularly convincing, on either side.
[ 06. August 2013, 09:29: Message edited by: Anglo Catholic Relict ]
Posts: 585 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Penny S, I haven't said God hasn't got a "feminine side". I've said that an over-emphasis on what appeals to women in the character of God is unhealthy. Essentially, if you take your indignation goggles off you see that I'm saying the same as you but from a male perspective.
Generally, an over-emphasis on what appeals to women tends to create the lenient god of liberal protestantism who has no wrath.. Likewise, an over-emphasis on what appeals to men creates the legalistic god of impersonal judgementalism who can't be loved.
Have you got any evidence for this? Because it still feels like (to this man at least) one huge stereotype, or set of stereotypes at least.
And writing off a legitimate complaint about the exclusion of women within Christianity over much of its history as "indignation goggles" is at best grossly insensitive and at worse deeply offensive and denying there's ever been a problem.
I didn't say there's never been "a problem", so there's no justifiable reason to take offence. The indignation I'm talking about is the indignation at what I'm saying about the church now, not about something I didn't say about the errors of the church fathers. I'm saying that there's a different problem in the church at this particular moment in history: and that problem is the over-feminisation of God.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglo Catholic Relict
Shipmate
# 17213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Generally, an over-emphasis on what appeals to women tends to create the lenient god of liberal protestantism who has no wrath.. Likewise, an over-emphasis on what appeals to men creates the legalistic god of impersonal judgementalism who can't be loved.
So, the over-feminised God lacks wrath, is liberal, lenient and protestant. Apparently women find this version of God appealing, which is news to me.
The over-masculinised God lacks the ability to be loved, is legalistic and impersonally judgmental. And men just love this version?
What strange creatures we are!
Posts: 585 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway
Likewise, an over-emphasis on what appeals to men creates the legalistic god of impersonal judgementalism who can't be loved.
So legalistic and impersonal judgementalism appeals to men, does it?
That's news to me. (I speak as a man).
Such crude stereotyping of men and women is really a form of sexism. To portray men as brutal judgement and killing machines is as discriminatory as portraying women as sex machines. This sort of simplistic and presumptuous thinking should have no place within the church of Jesus Christ.
It's very simple: for a man to be a true "man of God", all he has to do is be in a right relationship with the living God, seeking to do His will and living a godly life in the comfort, conviction, leading and peace of the Holy Spirit. In short: living in the grace of God. All other psychological profiling and stereotyping is at best a distraction from this and at worst deeply destructive, and I certainly want nothing to do with it (as I once made clear to a fellow male believer who was pressuring me to be part of his "men's ministry").
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Don't insult the other men here by claiming your perspective is the "male" one, daronmedway.
Tell me why you feel insulted, Arethosemyfeet. What has offended you in what I've actually said?
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglo Catholic Relict
Shipmate
# 17213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I'm saying that there's a different problem in the church at this particular moment in history: and that problem is the over-feminisation of God.
I am not sure how God is being over-feminised, when we have a notionally masculine Trinity, 12 male apostles, 4 male gospel writers and huge swathes of the church convinced that women cannot serve in the Sanctuary.
A small step towards remembering that the Wisdom of God is feminine, and that she too was with God in the beginning, as the Wisdom of Christ himself, has the potential to do a great deal of good. Nothing to do with lacking wrath or being liberal; everything to do with remembering that people are both male and female. And that we are made in the image of God.
Posts: 585 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway
Likewise, an over-emphasis on what appeals to men creates the legalistic god of impersonal judgementalism who can't be loved.
So legalistic and impersonal judgementalism appeals to men, does it?
There's plenty of women in the church who would answer yes to that question.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I didn't say there's never been "a problem", so there's no justifiable reason to take offence. The indignation I'm talking about is the indignation at what I'm saying about the church now, not about something I didn't say about the errors of the church fathers. I'm saying that there's a different problem in the church at this particular moment in history: and that problem is the over-feminisation of God.
I note you didn't answer the first part of my post - some evidence for this "overly-feminine" view of God that is too liberal and lacking in wrath and the "overly-masculine" view of God that is insufficiently loving and too keen on wrath. It still feels like a huge, and largely illusory, stereotype. Why do you associate those traits with males and females? Do you have anything to back it up with?
And I think what's happening now (if indeed anything is "happening" now given men still hold much of the power within the Church) is surely a reaction to and a correction of the exclusion of women down the centuries that Penny S was talking about. God has been seen as male and thereby endorsing "maleness"/"masculinity" (or stereotypes or distortions of those things) over against "feminimity". If that's changing then surely that's all for the good?
And perhaps the indignation that's being expressed is a worry that those truly Biblical feminine pictures of God that are just starting to be rediscovered are being pushed out again in the name of worries about male exclusion (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!)?
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Don't insult the other men here by claiming your perspective is the "male" one, daronmedway.
Tell me why you feel insulted, Arethosemyfeet. What has offended you in what I've actually said?
The idea that my views should have something in common with yours simply because I also have a Y chromosome is pretty insulting in itself. Plus the insinuation that unless I have a legalistic and judgmental idea of God then I'm not a real man.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte
Men perpetrate rape, they initiate war, they subject women to sexual apartheid, they conduct the bestial economic activity known as sexual slavery, they deny women economic and educational freedom. The list goes on and on.
Obviously your experience of life is rather limited. I work for a company in which almost the entire management is made up of women, and I have never experienced such cynical and brutal exploitation of workers and flagrant greed and incompetence. (Greed and exploitation are, of course, forms of rape: financial rape). It's impossible to blame 'men' for this. This is the so called 'care sector'.
Some of us are working to do something about it, on behalf of all the workers, and guess what... the workers who care the most about this situation are (wait for it...) the male staff.
Of course, unlike you, I would not blame all women - or women generally - for this injustice.
But that's because I understand the evil of accusing innocent people through stereotyping. Do you understand this?
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
