Matthew5sixteen

A Christian, Men’s Rights Activist’s Complaint July 29, 2010

In a May 5, 2006 post, “The Editor” of Faith and Society wrote a long complaint to answer the often asked question of “Why Men Aren’t Stepping Up (Like Sheep to the Slaughter)” to marriage. Terry of Breathing Grace, A Life In Bloom wrote a post on her blog in a sort of response. Terry’s post takes “a good, hard, honest look at the type of wife” some women behave as in their marriages. I would recommend reading Terry’s post for a woman’s perspective on behavior that a wife should try to avoid having in a marriage.

“The Editor” starts with a quote from Elisabeth Elliot, “Everywhere my husband and I go we meet lovely Christian women, beautifully dressed, deeply spiritual, thoroughly feminine–and single. They long for marriage and children. But what is it with the men? Are they blind to feminine pulchritude, deaf to God’s call, numb to natural desire? . . . Where are the holy men of God willing to shoulder the full responsibility of manhood, to take the risks and make the sacrifices of courting and winning a wife, marrying her and fathering children in obedience to the command to be fruitful? While the Church has been blessed by men willing to remain single for the sake of the Kingdom (and I do not regard lightly such men who are seriously called), isn’t it obvious that God calls most men to marriage? By not marrying, those whom He calls are disobeying Him, and thus are denying the women He meant for them to marry the privileges of being wife and mother.”

“The Editor” responds to Elisabeth Elliot, saying, “…This is a serious charge for someone to be making against religious men.” “The Editor” goes on to state his disagreement with Elliot’s statement, “First of all, and most importantly, the idea that God mandates most people to marry (pronuptialism) is a blatantly unscriptural idea.

…Secondly, I do not believe the doctrine of pronuptialism is a harmless doctrine. I think it has the potential for making a shipwreck of people’s faith.”

“The Editor” states, “For one thing, imagine a young soul being told he has no control over his sexual desires and therefore he has to marry (a notion based on a popular misreading of 1 Corinthians 7:2, 7:8-9). The problem is that he hasn’t won the obligatory popularity contest with the opposite sex. He remains single and frustrated. He gets angry at God because he assumes his Creator has given him an appetite that he can neither check nor lawfully sate. Robbed of any confidence he might have in controlling himself, he reasons, ‘I can’t help my feelings therefore I am going to do something illicit.’

Then there is another young man who looks at the onerous burden of marriage, all of the obligatory social expectations, the fallout from failed unions, etc. and shies away from matrimony. But here come the religious leaders to point their fingers at this young man and shame him for his choices. So, he gets bitter and drops out of church, or he ill-advisedly enters into marriage out of obligation to a social custom (not because he has any substantive feelings for his wife). The seeds of an unhappy marriage are thus sown.”

“The Editor” says, “God created marriage as a gift, not as a requirement … Thus, it can be said that marriage was made for man but not man for marriage.” And he says, “The kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom, not a physical one. We are not under the Old Covenant of Israel anymore, therefore God’s kingdom is not preserved by family lineage (Matthew 3:9; Luke 8:20-21; Luke 12:51-53). That is, the kingdom increases by sharing the Gospel (Matthew 27:19; Romans 1:16-17; James 1:18), not by making babies and filling padded pews with third-generation parishioners.”

“The Editor” continues with a section explaining “Why Men Aren’t Stepping Up (Like Sheep to the Slaughter)” to marriage. I will attempt to summarize the important points of this argument.

The arguments concern “money,” “arrogance about sex roles,” being “shallow,” “sex,” the blaming of men and “women behaving badly.”

In regards to “money,” “The Editor” says, “It takes money to raise a family…” And he criticizes the expectations of those who believe that it is the norm to have a traditional sized family while maintaining a comfortable lifestyle.

In regards to “arrogance about sex roles,” “The Editor” criticizes the idea that men always must take on the role of the provider. He states, “I wonder what happens when a man gets a disability and his wife has to care for him. Does he cease being a man since he is no longer physically strong? What about mental strength? I guess a college-educated woman has to pass up a man with a high school education, even though he’s wonderful in every other way.”

“The Editor” provides and criticizes a quote from Willard Harley, “a popular author among many Evangelicals [who] describes the type of man that women supposedly find ‘irresistible.’” The quote from Willard Harley, “He assumes the responsibility to house, feed, and clothe the family. If his income is insufficient to provide essential support, he resolves the problem by upgrading his skills to increase his salary. He does not work long hours, keeping himself from his wife and family, but is able to provide necessary support by working a forty to forty-five-hour week. While he encourages his wife to pursue a career, he does not depend on her salary for family living expenses.” “The Editor” states that people don’t want women to live as they did in the past with the limited opportunities and sacrifices that were common, but these same people still want men to follow the old rules of chivalry. “The Editor” calls this “neo-traditionalism” and he also calls it a double standard.

“The Editor” states that some people’s “views on ‘Biblical manhood’ and romantic relationships are … unrealistic and demeaning…

…In your marriages, you expect some sort of Superman who will make all of the hard decisions for you, read your mind, and somehow arrive at the choices you would pick. He will be emotionally strong, never have any fears, doubts, uncertainties, vulnerabilities, weakness, or (gasp) needs. The husband you want is not human. Indeed, I wonder why so many marriages in the Evangelical community end in divorce.”

I will mostly skip the argument on being “shallow.” It basically compares the shallowness of men and women in terms of what each gender finds attractive and unattractive in the other gender.

I will also mostly skip the argument on “sex.” It basically is suspicious of the motives of some women who want a family, arguing that they do it simply to better themselves in the eyes of others and not out of genuine love for their family. It also criticizes people who say men are not able to control their sexual desires, arguing that men do have the ability to control their sexual desires. It argues that men should not be goaded into getting married through fear and intimidation.

In regards to the blaming of men, “The Editor” has some strong words to say. I will highlight them because I believe they hold some relevance. He states, “…We have Promise Keepers to keep men on the straight and narrow, but where are the football stadiums full of women promising to be better wives and mothers? Are you women so infallible? Are you so untainted from the ungodliness in this culture?

Men have beaten down too much. We are told that we are insensitive; then we are told we are being too wimpy. We are too told that we need to be industrious and ambitious; then we are old that we work too much and don’t pay enough attention to our families. We were shamed for our desires for women; and now we are shamed for not desiring women.

…Why do religious pundits push this nonsense?”

I will also mostly skip the “women behaving badly” argument. It basically criticizes the unbalanced nature of divorce. It argues that Christian women are no save haven for men who wish to avoid these unbalances.

“The Editor” concludes, saying, “As long as everything is going well in their little world, they don’t care about what’s going on in ours. If these women are not willing to listen to our concerns before we marry them, they are probably not willing to do so afterwards.”

What is my opinion on all of this? I believe that “The Editor” makes some valid points. I would have voiced my opinions more diplomatically than he did in his post. Once again, I recommend that people also read Terry’s post, referenced at the beginning, to balance the Faith and Society post with something from a woman’s perspective.

I try to view the Faith and Society post as what I think it is, a complaint. “The Editor” views the suffering of men at the hands of society as being unjust. I suggest considering objectively what “The Editor” has to say and doing your own research on this matter. Don’t let mere opinions sway your thinking, but let facts form your judgement.

I leave you with this verse: “I pour out my complaint before him;
before him I tell my trouble.” (Psalm 142:2.)

Matthew5sixteen.