Posted on 08/28/2006 8:44:01 PM PDT by Quix
Thanks much.
You're already on.
This subject of acting like a man instead of a wuss is rich ore for the church to mine. Our culture has left a big gaping wound out there, due to this "gentle, meek and mild" expectation of men. What a magnet to draw these hurting relationships into the Kingdom.
= = = =
Very well put and AMEN!
Feminism helped cause men not to see what their proper role, their God-given role in life is. They try to be 'nice' but nice doesn't cut it. They need to be MALES as well and be what God created them to be.
> Prayers for her son and for her ministry are in order.
Prayers going up, for both.
I can appreciate that Dr Laura is on "our side" -- I just don't agree with her premise, that:
> "...we hardly raise men to be anything masculine anymore, we have at least two generations of men who have no clue what it means to be a 'man.' Hence too many guys are, as I have lamented many times on my radio program, males instead of men."
She needs to check out the local Rugby Club.
As the old saying goes, "Soccer is a gentleman's game played by ruffians and Rugby is a ruffian's game played by gentlemen"...
Amongst the First XV of any Rugby team worldwide she'll find more than enough masculine gentlemen to put "paid" to her premise. Like I said, real men don't phone into talk radio.
Dear Mary, I really don't mean to be disagreeable, but I do differ with your opinion.
Men taking their eyes off Jesus Christ and His commandments - men putting their eyes on anything in this world instead of on Christ the Word of God, Our Crucified and Risen Messiah - this, this is what causes any man to fail to perceive and walk in his proper role.
It is impossible that a person or a multitude of persons outside yourself can force your eyes, your mind, your heart, to any direction you don't desire and will these parts of yourself to go. I concede that perhaps under torture a person may have their eyes taped or glued or pinned open so that they are forced to gaze upon something, but that is not the case with feminism or with the current state of men in general.
[B]ut each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire,A worldling may blame feminism or anything he chooses for his sins, but not a Christian.
he is dragged away and enticed.
James 1:14"Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him.
Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean.'"
Mark 7:15
Thank you for your thoughtful post.
I see the subject as acting like Christ instead of acting like Adam:
So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven.
1 Corinthians 15:45-48
To the contrary, I see DieHard as putting his finger right on it.
Thanks, .30Carbine.
In my view, accountability comes down to Mom. It is her job to raise the kids in the right way (and no I do not care what Feminists have to say about that) and it is Dad's job to be a good example for the boys and a protector for the girls and a good provider for the whole Family.
If Mom wants to earn: fine. But her full-time job should be looking after the kids: if she has spare time then a second income is good. But not mandatory.
You see, nobody can reach boys as effectively and as permanently as Mom. Nobody.
Mom will formulate the way boys see their roles in life: if she is disrespectful of her husband and asserting her legitimate Feminist rights and not letting her boys be -- well -- boys, then she will raise Wusses: or as we say in NZ "Great Big Girls Blouses" -- guys ill-equipped to take the knocks in life.
(And, naturally, if Dad isn't there to provide a strong example when Mom fails to do her job, then the Lad will have nobody to emulate and thus no hope in Hell of developing normally: he'll be a Blouse by default and thru no fault of his own.)
Happily, most Moms have done a good job raising their boys. True, a few boys are dysfunctional: either thru the lack of guidance from Mom or good example by Dad. But a surprisingly large number of boys get by and prosper with a solo parent.
Sure, some guys get raised to be Blouses, and they cop ridicule and probably phone into radio talk shows as a result. That's Social Darwinianism taking its toll.
Most men are spared that embarassment thanks to Mom.
It is a huge, huge stretch to say that two entire generations of men do not know how to be men, only how to be males. Bulldust, I say. In a Feminist's Dream. Hasn't happened, won't. Time somebody stood up to this nonsense and said so.
So I have.
This may as well be public, imho. Given my mood today, I started out replying privately. I don't think DieHard will have any problem with this being publically posted. If he does, he can ask the mod to remove it and that'd be fine with me. If DieHard is Aussie, that might explain a lot of the difference and perceived difference.
However, of the Aussies I saw in Taiwan, I'd be cautious about assuming too much on that score. Their bravado in many cases seems authentic and well earned. But the holes in the masculine soul of many is also evident. That's certainly true of South Africans I knew transplanted to Australia.
= = = =
I mean no disrespect to Dr Laura, but for her to say that most men have forgotten how to be men and are merely male (or to that effect) is a shrill exaggeration at best and a gross insult if taken at face value.
True, there is a huge problem with youth today. I get to see this on the street in my role as a Guardian Angel. Two themes, in each case, become apparent:
1) Mom does not know and/or does not care where the youth is, and
2) Dad is either in Gaol or is unknown.
Feminism has taken its toll in some families, and Dad has been displaced and replaced, relegated to some inconsequential scrap-heap somewhere as a superfluous influence.
But most families are not like that. And most men are not like that. Most of us have spines, and most of us have hind legs that we occasionally stand up on when riled. Most of us enjoy testosterone as much as we enjoy alcohol.
But most families are not like that. And most men are not like that. Most of us have spines, and most of us have hind legs that we occasionally stand up on when riled. Most of us enjoy testosterone as much as we enjoy alcohol.
Dr Laura's position is shrill and alarmist. Men have forgotten how to be men? C'mon! Don't kid a kidder -- nobody could seriously take that premise in earnest at face value.
Some men may have forgotten: these are ball-less wonders who run off on their families and leave their kids without a dad and leave mom in the lurch. Such specimens deserve what opprobrium we as a Society can muster, and in the maximum quantities permitted by Law and good taste.
But that is not the majority of men. Most of us are decent guys with secure personalities.
= = = =
I don't know the solid statistics on such. I do know the following.
1. Dr Laura is not fabricating stuff up. She hears endlessly of this problem from the women who call and some of the men.
2. I have looked for/at solid males, good fathers in families most of my 60 years of life--well before I became a psychologist. I suppose it depends on one's definition. I've been very disappointed to see the relatively low percentage of what I'd call solid, good fathers with secure identities etc.
3. It is still true that most men live quiet lives of desperation stretched beyond their training and often beyond their psyche's, values and coping skills to do things well in their primary relationships and their jobs.
4. It doesn't take much for me to scratch the surface of most men to find deep rooted and raging insecurities that leave them exhausted managing; covering up etc. Often it makes them brittle and presenting a surface arrogance and bravado that's harsh to cruel.
5. In Taiwan, amongst the leading captains of Western Industry--they were men in the sense that they were serious leaders in their professions and great achievers/over achievers on those fronts, in those arenas. They were above average on those scores compared to most of the men in a range of churches in California, Washington State, Oregon and New Mexico where I observed such.
6. However, those same captains of industry in Taiwan were typically significantly to grossly incompetent and significantly to grossly insecure in their primary relationships. Their relationships with their children were dreadful. They typically tried to out power everyone around them to avoid anyone hinting that they were less than perfect etc.
7. They routinely provoked their children to wrath from an early age. They rarely had time for relationships escaping into overwork chronically. Their wives felt and were largely deserted to fend for themselves and manage the kids. The lavish money and comforts available didn't seem to help much at all.
- - - - -
8. It is conceivable that your sample population is skewed in an opposite way than the majority of people we counselors see.
9. Nevertheless, I'd guesstimate that in the average BETTER church that I've been in--in the States and elsewhere--I'd guesstimate that 60-85% of the men have self-esteem, identity, masculinity, insecurity, false pride etc. issues of significant depth, breadth and intensity. And, that their primary relationships suffer greatly therefrom. Essentially, I believe that Dr Laura is right. She has detected a dreadful trend hazarding our society.
> If DieHard is Aussie, that might explain a lot of the difference and perceived difference.
(Big grin) It's OK -- lots of people make that mistake. I'm a Kiwi. My Mom & Dad are Canadian.
> I don't think DieHard will have any problem with this being publically posted.
Nope. No problem at all: this is a great thread and a topic worthy of spirited debate. What say you?
> 2. I have looked for/at solid males, good fathers in families most of my 60 years of life--well before I became a psychologist. I suppose it depends on one's definition. I've been very disappointed to see the relatively low percentage of what I'd call solid, good fathers with secure identities etc.
May I venture a good explanation for this? Few solid, good fathers with secure identities are likely to seek the aid and company of a psychologist? They're more likely to be taking their son to Aikido class, or to be watching the Rugby, or even hoisting one-or-three down at the Pub with their mates while the kids are doing piano lessons.
> 7. They routinely provoked their children to wrath from an early age. They rarely had time for relationships escaping into overwork chronically. Their wives felt and were largely deserted to fend for themselves and manage the kids. The lavish money and comforts available didn't seem to help much at all.
Most of the Lads I know see it this way: your kids give you one opportunity -- just one -- to share in the wonderful gift that is their childhood. You either take them up on that offer, or you don't. They will grow up regardless. You will either be in for a wonderful time full of magic and mystery and plenty of laughs, or you will miss out. Most of us, given the choice, try to opt in for the wonderful time.
I'm not saying there aren't plenty of men who are lousy fathers: there are. I am saying that it is a huge stretch to confidently assert that most men have forgotten how to be men and are just merely males be default.
*DieHard*
Thanks. I think ALL the Kiwi's I've met overseas were rather mellow blokes. Not passive mellow, just not all fussed up about petty stuff.
I think you under rated my assertion that in my guesstimation 60-85% of the men I've observed in a variety of churches across a large geography have been greatly lacking in the traits . . . quite as Dr Laura describes. I could say the same thing about any other collection of men in groups above say a dozen or 3.
I do think from all I've seen, had contact with, read . . . that there MAY be SOME above average healthiness to the population of NZ from a number of perspectives. But you sure have your percentage of crazies, too. It just may be a considerably smaller percentage though that's not certain--according to my dear Christian brother I email with a lot there.
In most even better churches . . . I've had to think hard to think of men who'd persistently give up work time for kids and ball time. It's been dreadfully sad for me to see.
> I do think from all I've seen, had contact with, read . . . that there MAY be SOME above average healthiness to the population of NZ from a number of perspectives.
Child abuse/murder is an epidemic here. Sadly, it appears to be disproportionately skewed along racial lines: a quick Google will confirm that.
That said, most kids in NZ grow up healthy and balanced and are not abused.
Abuse in some areas of the Western world seems to be reaching epidemic proportions.
But, it's been predicted that lawlessness etc. would increase dramatically at the end of the age.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.