Gender Theorists Can’t Keep Their Story Straight

What a different world we’d have if more people evaluated a belief system, not from what they assume about it, but what they learn from the experienced and serious people who hold those beliefs. Because of my work at Focus on the Family, I’ve had the fortune to do this over the last decade or more with the gender studies community.

They are quite different than I am. Like 99.999 percent of the world, I hold that humanity presents itself as male and female, solely. Our gender studies friends believe this is a tragically uninformed, if not oppressive, view. What have I learned by venturing outside my own bubble and observing this different world? I have much to tell, and no one could make up this stuff.

Continue reading here

Advertisements
Posted in commentary, culture, femininity, lesbian, lgbt, manhood, masculinity, politics, Sexuality | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Why Manhood Doesn’t Happen Naturally

In terms of human development, healthy masculinity is not natural. It doesn’t just happen. It must be constructed. This is not the case with womanhood. Her biological make-up ensures the girl will more naturally grow into a healthy woman. As her body matures, internally and externally, it sends her and those around her an unmistakable message of what she is and what she is becoming. It moves her in a very particular direction with great force. Her family and community treat her differently because of it.

The boy’s transition into manhood is not similarly pre-determined. It must be created with significant intentionality.

Manhood is a behavior that must be taught, an identity that must be bestowed by a boy’s family and the larger community of men.

Why is this so?

The male nature doesn’t naturally go in the direction society needs it to go in. It is more oriented toward extremes – lethargy and passivity, or aggression and sexual opportunism. Manhood must be crafted.

Margaret Mead is one of the early anthropologists to study the societal phenomenon of manhood. She observed this necessity:

In every known human society, everywhere in the world, the young male learns that when he grows up, one of the things which he must do in order to be a full member of society is to provide food [and protection] for some female and her young. …[E]very known human society rests firmly on the learned nurturing behavior of men.

She explains why this must be intentionally done generation after generation:

…[T]his behavior, being learned, is fragile and can disappear rather easily under social conditions that no longer teach it effectively.1

It is the precise opposite for women. She must be ideologically and politically pressured, with great potency, to abandoned and ignore her children.

This brings us to the nub of the issue.

The most elemental destabilizing forces in every culture are unchecked male sexuality and strength. If a society does not find a way to bring these under control, society is impossible to sustain, and very bad things happen.

It is only when these two things are corralled that a healthy, safe and productive society can take shape and sustain itself. Only then can women and their children thrive. As Mead explained, there is no human culture that has sustained itself without doing this.

Now, what must be learned must be taught, and the more consequential it is, the greater intentionality it requires. Manhood can only really be taught and developed by older men, instructing and showing what is expected of the boy in order to become a part of the fraternity of good men. Mothers and girlfriends can influence this, to be sure, but they cannot deliver it. It is a transfer of ideals, behaviors, attitudes and beliefs from one generation of men to the next.

This is unarguably the first work of family formation and community sustainability as it affects industry and economics, criminality, health-care, education and every other essential part of any community. It is the work of human culture and well-being.

The primary question is how one generation of men accomplishes this in their service to the next generation of women, children and the society. And particularly, how we do it in today’s culture with all its unique challenges?

This question and its answer must become a national concern.

____________________

  1. Margaret Mead, Male and Female, William Morrow & Co., 1968, p. 189, 192.
Posted in cultural analysis, culture, feminism, manhood; masculinity, Sexuality, Uncategorized, womanhood | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Man with a Gun in Taco Bueno

Last week I was taking advantage of .99 cent taco burgers at Taco Bueno. Taco burgers. 99 cents. Duh.

As I’m enjoying my dinner, a man walks in with a gun. Few were in the place, so there was not a mad reaction. This man had a gun. It was a good size pistol, right there in the restaurant. It was a startling thing. But my reaction was the opposite of what you might imagine and I was personally struck by this.

I felt safer than before he walked in. Why?

This man was a dressed casually, but nicely, in jeans, cowboy boots and an outdoor work shirt, tucked in. He had his pistol neatly holstered to his substantive leather belt. There was no reason to think he was a law enforcement authority who would naturally carry a gun. He simply appeared to be a regular, but responsible, citizen with a fire arm strapped to his side. (Colorado permits open carry.)

It did startle me because you don’t normally see such a thing in public life. As quickly as I felt the startle, I realized that if something were to go south in this taco place, a terrorist attack or a robbery, I’d be much safer with this particular man with his gun there. Then I wondered why I felt this way. What made this different than another, different person totting a gun through the door?

It was how the gun was displayed.

Ironically because it was in clear sight. If he had the gun obviously hidden, but easily accessible tucked under a coat, that would have had me hit the floor. If he had it clearly in the open, in his hand, even more scary!

But this man had the gun, safely tucked away, but clearly ready to use it if needed. Does one hold a gun like that if he means harm? Anyone knew he had that gun for protective reasons, for a noble purpose. It was not for evil. It was not for sport, but for protection of himself and others.

You could also tell by the way he carried the gun that he likely knew how to handle it in such a situation. He had a humble confidence, it wasn’t for show or as a statement.  That is important.

Guns in public can be scary for sure. Especially in a society where mass shootings have sadly become regular events. But guns can also be comforting, as this man’s presence demonstrated to me. It is not the gun itself that determines this, but in whose hand it is and how they intend to handle it.

I’m glad that that man with that gun was there, even if he might ever need to use it.

Posted in commentary, cultural analysis, culture | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

HRC Celebrates Walmart for Having Same Bathroom Policy as North Carolina

No one missed that the Human Rights Campaign, the largest and most powerful gay lobby in the world, called down unrelenting hell-fire upon the state of North Carolina for their bathroom policy last year. You surely missed that this year, HRC also awarded Walmart, who holds an even more restrictive bathroom policy, its highest gold-star, 100% rating for being a “best place to work for LGBT equality” and overall LGBT friendliness as a corporation. The very same rating they awarded Target.

I explain here in detail how this terribly embarrassing mix-up could have happened. Hint: HRC doesn’t make trans-bathroom access a requirement for earning their 100% LGBT equality rating. True.

This is an important story on this whole issue as we each seek to navigate this issue in our own minds as well as in the public square.

Posted in cultural analysis, culture, lesbian, lgbt, politics, Sexuality, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Thick as a Brick Cover That’s Thick as a Brick

I’ve been a Jethro Tull fan since the age of 10.

Looking at JT music tonight on YouTube, I stumbled upon this interesting bit.

It’s a group of young music school hipster-nerds from the Berklee College of Music in Boston promising a live performance of the LP length, continuously played, musical suite Thick as a Brick. A very technical, difficult and complex piece of music. I winced when I considered the greatness of the piece against the look of the kids poised to perform it. I SOOO do not like average people doing covers of bands I really love. It often turns out just embarrassing. I was prepared to either laugh or cry at this performance … and not in a good way.

But as the first few notes rise from Ian Anderson’s opening acoustic part – by a dude in a cheap Halloween hotdog outfit no less – it was mirrored perfect. Perfect! Flat out stunning. Even Ian himself would be impressed and I’m sure he’s seen it.

So I kept listening for the next 43:20 minutes and every note of it is extraordinary. Enchanting. Really no words for it. These kids are the just stinkin’ impressive, little nerds that they are. And it is not a “good enough for students” offering they bring.

Much of it sounds as if they are playing to a sound track, it’s so spot on, having the complexity and thickness of the original. But it doesn’t seem that they’re playing to any enhancement. I could be wrong. You can see each player producing what is needed at the moment, although there is one violin section at the end that doesn’t seem true to sound. All the rest is cash money.

The young drummer IS Barrie Barlow! The keyboardist, 98.555% John Evan and the hipster psychedelic electric guitarist is as close to Martin Barre as one can get.

As for Ian?

The young woman playing the flute is pretty dog-gone impressive. She doesn’t have the explosive energy of Ian, but who in the world does? Not even the Sun. She’s got no faults in her contribution though. Just lovely, and it’s fun to see her having so much fun with it.

The vocalist? He doesn’t even try to channel Ian and that is very good. He only tries to serve as a vocalist placeholder. His own interpretation and stage presence is pleasantly adequate, which he does impressively. He gives exactly what he should. The kids are trying to present the complexity and wonder of the music itself, not the band.

I got goose bumps as I listened, the way they absolutely nailed the beauty of many of the very technical transitions. The way they affected some of the beautiful riffs on the album. Even the funky jazz improve section in the middle of the whole bit. And they did it as millennial hipsters. How do they even know about Jethro Tull?

Well they do. And they know Thick as a Brick stunningly well. How they broke the album down to know what instruments, technical effects and timing they needed? That is remarkable in itself. I could imagine them sitting around with the vinyl listening to it over and again, taking notes, debating what was actually what.

Just an absolutely marvelous, deeply impressive and nearly flawless piece of work. You should listen to the whole thing even if you’re not a Tull fan.  It’s worth it.

Other Tull fans, I would love to hear your take on it.

Posted in arts, cultural analysis, music, reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

How the Google Guy Got It Exactly Right

A myriad of distinguished professors and social scientists have already confirmed what James Damore wrote in his Google memo: men and women are measurably different.

The Google guy behind the infamous gender memo, James Damore, is a troglodyte. An embarrassing, knuckle-dragging, flat-earther who is under the silly illusion that men and women have inherent differences. Google properly fired him for just being stupid. At least that’s the fashionable story.

But the truth is that it was Damore who got it right.

Read how strongly the best emerging science backs him here.

Posted in campus, cultural analysis, culture | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

What is a Christian? Insight From an Unlikely Source

The famous atheist philosopher, Bertrand Russell, had the following to say in the opening of his book, Why I am Not a Christian. It is actually a good and challenging word His Church today.

“I think that you must have a certain amount of definite belief before you have the right to call yourself a Christian. The word does not have quite such a full-blooded meaning now as it had in the days of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. In those days, if a man said that he was a Christian it was known what he meant. You accepted a whole collection of creeds which were set out with great precision, and every single syllable of those creeds you believed with the whole strength of your convictions. Nowadays it is not quite like that.”

Posted in atheism, christian faith, cultural analysis, culture, God, sociology of religion, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment