But this is good. Nor do I have an opinion on this particular matter, because A) I'm Catholic; B) the words don't mean the same thing within Catholic theology and praxis as in this context (or at least it seems unwise, based upon my knowledge and experience, to presume that the meanings of the terms are the same) and C) it seems like we need more precise definitions in general.
On a personal note, if it is not manly to watch musicals--and like them--then here are my Man Cards. And yet, those cards would not be worth the paper they are printed on. Because that's stupid. You hear that, Driscoll? Stop turning manliness into an awkward health class video from 1978. One of the things I love dearly about "The Doctrine Of Humanity" by Charles Sherlock (quite apart from the bad arguments for female ordination, and that terrible Anglican/Protestant sacramental presumption) is that he includes a chapter on being a man, and one on being a woman. He says essentially that you are manly or womanly partly just by being what you are. And though we may be rightly upset by cultural markers and definitions in either direction that box us in at the margins, we can't accept wholesale redefinitions, either. After all, generalizations or stereotypes are rarely false in every way, or on every occasion.
As I understand the terms, I do not share the goals and assumptions of various feminisms, even if I could sympathize with some of the people who might adopt the label. I am not unaware that feminism broadly speaking is multifaceted; nevertheless, I do believe--and I do ask pardon if I cause offense--that Christians of various stripes have affirmed the movement uncritically, in response to a self-perception of having accommodated Christian teaching to various misogynistic cultural structures.
The extent to which this has actually occurred is legitimately in question, and, to be frank, we cannot use a bad idea to fix a problem, even if we gain wide agreement on the problem.
The problem is, this culture--we--hate women. In truth, we hate men also, but we hate women more. We objectify them, shame them, kill them, and oppress them in so many different ways, it boggles the mind. And a great many of the oppressors think that they are helping! For all I know, Sandra Fluke is reading this. Sandra, you hate women. You hate yourself, and you don't even know. Or maybe you do. But I want people to be who they are supposed to be. I am not the arbiter of that, but I know that killing your own children, and pumping yourself full of drugs because you do not accept the responsibility of being a human being (our sexuality as it comes to us) is not it.
I also deeply know that the "rape culture" is real, and I know that the young people who committed the crimes in Steubenville are not unique. In general, we think it's OK to use each other--especially women--to please ourselves. And both sexes perpetuate that, unless we are actively working against it. And that's what unites commentary on moral degradation with feminist critiques. It's just that some of us have not been careful to put the blame where it belongs, even when those crimes are a symptom of the deeper problem.
We don't need "equality"; we need love and mutual self-giving. Life between men and women is not supposed to be zero-sum. And that is the feminist/chauvinist assumption behind the entire discussion. It will continue harming us until we expose it for the lie that it is.
On a personal note, if it is not manly to watch musicals--and like them--then here are my Man Cards. And yet, those cards would not be worth the paper they are printed on. Because that's stupid. You hear that, Driscoll? Stop turning manliness into an awkward health class video from 1978. One of the things I love dearly about "The Doctrine Of Humanity" by Charles Sherlock (quite apart from the bad arguments for female ordination, and that terrible Anglican/Protestant sacramental presumption) is that he includes a chapter on being a man, and one on being a woman. He says essentially that you are manly or womanly partly just by being what you are. And though we may be rightly upset by cultural markers and definitions in either direction that box us in at the margins, we can't accept wholesale redefinitions, either. After all, generalizations or stereotypes are rarely false in every way, or on every occasion.
As I understand the terms, I do not share the goals and assumptions of various feminisms, even if I could sympathize with some of the people who might adopt the label. I am not unaware that feminism broadly speaking is multifaceted; nevertheless, I do believe--and I do ask pardon if I cause offense--that Christians of various stripes have affirmed the movement uncritically, in response to a self-perception of having accommodated Christian teaching to various misogynistic cultural structures.
The extent to which this has actually occurred is legitimately in question, and, to be frank, we cannot use a bad idea to fix a problem, even if we gain wide agreement on the problem.
The problem is, this culture--we--hate women. In truth, we hate men also, but we hate women more. We objectify them, shame them, kill them, and oppress them in so many different ways, it boggles the mind. And a great many of the oppressors think that they are helping! For all I know, Sandra Fluke is reading this. Sandra, you hate women. You hate yourself, and you don't even know. Or maybe you do. But I want people to be who they are supposed to be. I am not the arbiter of that, but I know that killing your own children, and pumping yourself full of drugs because you do not accept the responsibility of being a human being (our sexuality as it comes to us) is not it.
I also deeply know that the "rape culture" is real, and I know that the young people who committed the crimes in Steubenville are not unique. In general, we think it's OK to use each other--especially women--to please ourselves. And both sexes perpetuate that, unless we are actively working against it. And that's what unites commentary on moral degradation with feminist critiques. It's just that some of us have not been careful to put the blame where it belongs, even when those crimes are a symptom of the deeper problem.
We don't need "equality"; we need love and mutual self-giving. Life between men and women is not supposed to be zero-sum. And that is the feminist/chauvinist assumption behind the entire discussion. It will continue harming us until we expose it for the lie that it is.
Comments