There is much lamenting these days about the fact that our culture keeps men in a state of prolonged adolescence. A recent version of that lament appeared in the Feb. 19 Wall Street Journal article “Where Have the Good Men Gone?” by Kay S. Hymowitz. The story she tells is of men who don’t seem to want to grow up; sports, video games and electronic gadgets seem enough to satisfy them.
Sexual encounters come easily, so marriage is not a pressing need. It is also an obstacle that the most desirable women are more accomplished than they are, not that they care much to be accomplished — as long as they have enough income to satisfy their whims. The fact that some of the most successful men in our time seem to love their success largely because they can wear T-shirts and jeans all the time speaks volumes.
It wasn’t always thus. Men used to wear hats and suits and ties. And liked it. They felt manly doing so.
Certainly, it is easy and wrong to romanticize the past, but there is reason to miss at least some elements of days gone by. My dad died two years ago at the age of 88. He was, in many ways, a man typical of his generation. He was manly, responsible, dutiful and faithful. He told me that when he was a boy, boys quite desperately wanted to be men. And they knew what it was to be a man. They knew they had to acquire a skill to be able to get a job, and they needed to learn how to court and respect women. These accomplishments enabled them to win the women they wanted as mothers for their future children and to provide well for them. They had a strong sense of responsibility and wanted to make a contribution to the common good. That was pretty much the script of my dad’s life.
As a young boy, he worked in his dad’s grocery store and developed a strong work ethic. He told me when he was in 10th grade he was expected to ask a girl to the regular Saturday night dance at the high school. He would ask her on Wednesday as a matter of courtesy, but also so they would have the time to practice their dance steps. (An otherwise somewhat clumsy man, my father was smooth as silk on the dance floor.) He would have to walk up to the door of her house and shake her father’s hand, who would look him in the eye and tell him, “I expect you to take good care of my daughter, son” (said with a deepened voice). The next week, he would ask a different girl out; maybe the first girl’s sister or best friend, but never the same girl twice, since it was considered very wrong to “go steady.”
After his service in WWII, Dad came back ready to settle down. He met my mom working in the university cafeteria and married her because she was beautiful, hardworking and good. Their letters to each other when they lived apart for a few months are as chaste and sweet a correspondence as can be found. My parents raised six children, first on a shoestring and then quite comfortably, as a result of his careful planning and my mother’s frugality. He was very active in the Jaycees, a group that did civil-service projects such as building tennis courts and ball diamonds; he coached athletic teams; he was president of the PTA and the sports boosters club and more. He also loved to play; he bragged that he never worked more than 40 hours a week (38 1/2 during the summer for the purposes of golf); and he used up every vacation day. Duty first, but as much play as possible.
For much of his life, he practiced his Catholicism in a fairly routine fashion, driven largely by his gratitude. Then, as he aged, his faith matured to be a quiet and strong force. With his death, it has become clearer and clearer what an exemplar he was of the highest values for his children and grandchildren and all those blessed to know him; indeed, he continues to exercise a strong influence on us.
I have been reading these columns on the sad state of modern manhood combined with the memories of my admirable dad and his generation against the background of rereading Kristin Lavransdatter, a book that should be read at least once in one’s youth and again in adulthood. Like Augustine’s Confessions, it seems to strike a note of authenticity about the role that passions and relationships play in most people’s lives. Kristin was a woman whose motherhood enabled her to undergo a steady and true maturation, but who nevertheless still made unwise decisions, driven by unbridled passion or smoldering resentment. Despite her seriously sinful actions and attitudes, Kristin’s faith ultimately carried her through a life of profound sorrows and intermittent ecstatic joy and shaped her soul into one truly devoted to God.
While Kristin and her fateful choices dominate Sigrid Undset’s superb novel, the title is apt not only because it carries her moniker, but because she is very much portrayed as Lavransdatter, the daughter of Lavrans. Lavrans was an upright man, kind, generous, forgiving, pious and wise. He was imperfect, in a way understandable for a man in an arranged marriage to a woman who had loved someone else. That he was imperfect surely makes him a more believable character, but his moral excellence was such that, in the end, it served to assuage the harm done by his inability to fully love his wife.
Throughout the book, Lavrans is referenced as a person who lived in accord with God’s will and who ordered all of his affairs justly, though he could also engage enthusiastically in immoderate drinking and tale-telling. After his death, they discovered his flagellant, which suggests he had unruly passions that he struggled to subdue. In 14th-century Norway, a country shaped by noble pagan ideals and elevated by Christianity, but still inhabited by those who easily settled a dispute by swordplay, Lavrans stood out as one who brought Christian civility to all.
In contrast, Erlend, Kristin’s husband, was never able to achieve the manliness of her father. He was a fine shipbuilder and swordsman, had dash and elegance, a sly seductive smile, and an irresistible joie de vivre, but he could not develop the virtues necessary to be a responsible steward of his possessions, a supportive husband to his wife, and a worthy role model for his sons.
The story of Erlend indicates that boys who fail to become men have always been with us; it also shows how that failure wreaks havoc on their wives and seriously shortchanges their children. The story of men like my father and Lavrans serve to show what beautiful things men can do when they strive to be men, the men God meant them to be.
Janet Smith holds the Father Michael J. McGivney Chair of Life Ethics at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, Michigan.
Comments
Post a Comment
Until our society shows concern for what men are actually going through these days, especially young men, it is not going to get the results it wants from us. It has been saying to us for decades: “You don’t matter. We don’t care about you. Leave us alone.” Now, in a bizarre twist, the same society is turning around and berating us for everything it finds wanting in our character. Berating, but not caring. Demanding, but not offering any help. You people have no idea what we have been going through - none - and you do not care. Yet you have the nerve to scold us? Ha. Do you really think you matter to us? Go away. These are your problems, not ours. Live with them.
Women are endlessly solipsistic. Whether you are feminist or Catholic or some awkward attempt at both you can do nothing but think about yourselves. Has it occurred to you ladies that we men don’t think much of you, either? That we wonder where the good women have gone? Do you think we’re really impressed by all your egocentric power whoring these last few decades? Are you prepared to accept the demands we men would lay on you? Your behavior says “No. Absolutely not. We will keep doing whatever *we* want, and you men will just have to put up with us.” So hopelessly self-absorbed is your sex that even as you shirk all responsibilities to men you continue to demand that we do our part for you. Ha. Ha. Ha. By the way, how is that working for you? No! - don’t answer. I don’t care. Do you put out? No? See you later.
Ladies, trust me, as unhappy as you are with men today, it is only going to get much worse. We men are not stupid enough to stand around taking care of you while you continue to do whatever you want. We are not stupid enough to listen to your *endless* demands while you show absolutely zero concern for what our own needs are. Nope. The mask is off, ladies. We are not duped by your lies any more, not even when you yourselves believe them. We see you as the ugly, self-absorbed, self-excusing creatures you are. And we are going to get what we want from you from now on. Many men have already gone down this path. It sounds like the next generation is considerably worse in this regard already. Your complaints will mean nothing to us and maybe then you will begin to understand again that men are more than your slaves.
Peace.
David, I do not know what age you are but I am not yet 30. That attitude will not get you anywhere. Be a man in the real sense of the term anyway, because you will have to face your Maker one day. Be a man anyway because it is even more manly to be a man when there are few men around. Be a man anyway because it is satisfying to be one.
Perhaps the women forget that they also will face their Maker someday.
Probably more to the point, Paul, if you’re advocating being a man because that is what God wants, then let’s do it the hilt. When did we decide to let women rule us? No, men today aren’t manly in part because they do whatever it takes to please women. That has nothing to do with strength, honor, or integrity. It is, in fact, cowardice. It is self-love. No, if we want to be men, we need to do it all the way. That means, among other things, striking out and putting an end to the feminine nonsense that is ruining the West, and reinstating the value and the unabashed leadership of the masculine.
Yes, they will. But you are a man, or should be, and you won’t have to face your Maker having been an endlessly solipsistic female.
As a side benefit, you will be more attractive to the few women out there who strive for true womanhood as much as you strive for true manhood.
Well, fine, Richard and Paul. I’m listening. Still, I do not want to stand before God as a man who remained silent and passive in the face of evil. We all know what happened to the first man who made that mistake. Let’s be careful that the desire to follow God not become an excuse for inaction.
Being a Man means being truly virtuous. When I had just gone to university a friend and I started to do some weight training. My friend just wanted to do bench presses and “look good” for the ladies. I was more concerned with building real strength to accompany my martial arts training at the time. It is more important “to be” than to “look like you are”.
As for pleasing a woman, there can be something deeply satisfying to do so for a man however this does not mean letting them rule us. In fact if you ask any older man about this he (if he is wise) will tell you that if you let a woman rule you, you will lose her respect.
As regards being virtuous, be always charitable in speech and things will go well.
Be good and God Bless
David, you criticize women for wanting nothing to do with us, but then turn and say you want nothing to do with them. You condemn society for berating while not caring, and yet you have no charity in your own words. You group all women, which includes my wife, into the mold of some woman (or women) who hurt you in the past, and this is unjust. Part of being a real man is having control over your emotions, not letting them have control over you.
The first few sentences of your first comment are a good synopsis of the issue, but then you allow anger and bitterness to deter you from what could have been a fine post. Adam failed Eve by allowing the devil into Eden. Be careful not to fail women by allowing the devil into your heart.
http://www.integratedcatholiclife.org/2011/01/kreeft-the-winning-strategy/
I recommend that anyone coming here read this article.
God Bless
“David, you criticize women for wanting nothing to do with us, but then turn and say you want nothing to do with them.
Exactly, Dennis. Women have broken the social contract. First, they have spent the last sixty years telling us quite forcefully that we men mean nothing to them. Second, they have nothing more than a utilitarian regard for us. Perhaps this has always been the case. In any event, the recent spate of articles whining about the dearth of men, while showing absolutely zero concern for men for their own sake, and worse, bashing men in ways subtle and explicit clearly reveals the strictly utilitarian regard women have for our sex. Since women have enthusiastically renounced any sense of responsibility toward men, and since women don’t actually care about us all, it is laughable that they continue to place demands on us. Because women want nothing to do with us, I really want nothing to do with them. Why? Because I am not here to be used!
Now you can call me out for my lack of charity. Paul and Richard already did. Fine. Begrudgingly I will say that I will work on it. Still, think of how few men today will do the same. They are more than happy to adjust to the new paradigm. Women will, of course, complain. These men will not care. They are going to make women pay attention, whether anyone likes it or not. Unfortunately, it is not God’s sons who are doing anything to solve the problem, but the devil’s. Oh, well. At least we’re ‘charitable’. I mean, I chose to follow Jesus because he was the Nicest Man Who Ever Lived. At least, that’s what I thought. It turns out we Catholic men are even nicer than Him. Wait - nicer than Him? Um. That’s a good thing, right?
It’s interesting that I am criticized for my resentment, but none of you men have anything to say about the injustice that gives rise to it. Why is that? And by the way, Adam’s failure wasn’t keeping Satan out of the Garden. He couldn’t have helped that. His failure was not leading Eve. When Eve was tempted, Adam should have gone with her to God and asked for His help. So what do you charitable men say we should do to lead today’s women back to God? Or are do you just want men like me to shut up and stop talking about the problem?
As for your wife, Dennis, you should have the good sense to realize I am not criticizing her. I am speaking in generalities. What, does my every comment need to be preceded by “Warning: May Not Apply To Your Wife”?
Two thoughts come to mind: First, I don’t think that Dr. Smith is so much criticizing men as she is the society. Anyone who has read her work would recognize her thrust, methinks. This is simply another aspect of the “culture of death”: boys who refuse to grow up—and why should they when everything they (think they) want (sex, expensive toys) can be had without doing so? Second, this article discusses one manifestation of the human quandary, which is perhaps more along the lines David is headed. If we are honest, we will admit that our society teaches both men and women to be manipulators: women manipulate men with sex, and men allow themselves to be manipulated for sex. What’s worse, this is sometimes explained as a means toward a happy marriage (“If you want Mike to do x,y, and z for you, you should have sex with him” ; “If you want Sara to have sex with you, do x, y, and z for her.”) HOWEVER, I think that the work done by folks like Dr. Smith can help us to open our eyes to the utilitarian approach to relationships that we’ve taken to be the real deal so that we as human beings and as Catholics can learn truly to live by the “gift of self” that marriage is meant to be.
David, for the last 60 years, many men have been using the birth control pill to control women, having nothing but a utilitarian regard for them. Blaming the breaking of the social contract on women is inaccurate and unjust.
Quite honestly, I do want you to, in your words, shut up if this is how you are going to address the issue. You are not constructively addressing the problem, solving the problem, or leading women back to God. If any woman finds what you say helpful, I hope they comment so that I can be corrected on that point.
I spend a good part of my life talking to high schoolers, college students, and adults about what it means to be a man and the roles of men and women. I do not pull any punches, telling men they need to be strong and that wives should allow their husbands to lead because their leadership should be done out of love for their wife. I am doing God’s work trying to lead men and women back to God, speaking about how men and women mistreat each other, but without the name calling and insulting.
As an aside, the word used for ‘till’ in the Bible is the same word used for ‘guard’. It was Adam’s job to guard the Garden, and he failed in that.
Finally, it would be considerate of you to stop generalizing. When done in the manner you are using, it comes across as accusatory towards everyone you are referring to.
If you wish to have a calm and constructive talk about this issue, I will be happy to keep going. But if you decide to return with more anger and ranting, then the only thing I can do is pray for you.
“David, for the last 60 years, many men have been using the birth control pill to control women, having nothing but a utilitarian regard for them. Blaming the breaking of the social contract on women is inaccurate and unjust.”
How is the birth control pill used to control women? Regarding the breaking of the social contract, women do not have the total blame, but I am sorry, they have most of it by far. It is not men but women who have been pushing change in the relationship between the sexes for the last 60 years. I would be interested to know why you don’t see it this way.
“Men need to be strong and wives should allow their husbands to lead because their leadership should be done out of love for the wife.”
There is something subtle in this statement that I suspect reflects your overall view of the matter, Dennis. You say men ‘need’ to be strong but wives ‘should’ allow their husbands to lead. It would sound quite different if the words were swapped: “Men should be strong and wives need to allow their husbands to lead.” Demands for men, suggestions for women. This parallels the fact that you although you have complained on women’s behalf, you have yet to say anything of the difficulties men face. You challenged me for my lack of charity, but said nothing about my complaints. More to the point, in the above statement, it is all about the woman. Men need to be strong - for women, of course. Women need to let men lead - for their own sake, of course. It is always about the woman. At what point do we begin to consider the needs of men? What, for example, does the woman do for the man? Your comments are very much like others I’ve heard… everywhere else. I am beginning to think women are nothing but a complaining burden and that I myself am a persona non grata. Get angry with me if you want, Dennis, but I am telling you the truth. We are always marching to the same drumbreat - Women are never challenged. Women are all that matter. Men’s needs don’t matter. Men have to do this. Men have to do that. It’s really like that!
“...speaking about how men and women mistreat each other…”
You actually do speak to women as well about how they mistreat men? I have never heard anyone do this anywhere, period. Always the person tells us men what we’re doing wrong while the women smirk. I mean, really, I will be seriously impressed if you give a fair and balanced treatment to your students on this point, because if you do, it’s one in a million.
“If you wish to have a calm and constructive talk about this issue, I will be happy to keep going. But if you decide to return with more anger and ranting, then the only thing I can do is pray for you.”
I really take exception to this. First, you have yet to acknowledge anything I’ve said about men. If you intend to ignore the needs and complaints of have the population, you do not really want a constructive conversation. Second, if a woman had written a comment like mine, would you have corrected her for her lack of charity? Third, I am not going to apologize for my anger. It is real and there are reasons it exists. You said that I insulted you, but I truly do not see where I’ve done so.
I really wonder if anyone here is able to break out of the “Women are hard done / Men are to blame” paradigm. So far only ECDODGE has been willing to give it a shot. Predictably, the rest have gone the easy way and chosen to ignore fully half the world’s population. “Be nice, David. Stop complaining. Now let’s hear what the women have to say. Oh, poor women! We men are so bad!” Nothing new under the sun indeed! So who else is going to tell me to shut up and get us onto the topic of how bad women have it, like we haven’t already spent the last 60 years examining that question?
Dear David, I would have thought that my recommendation to read Dr Kreefts article which I posted above would have shown you that I don’t really fit into the paradigm. The fact is that the world is in a mess, and we are in a culture war. Being a Man anyway, and being a virtuous Catholic Man is what we are called to do. I do not blame anyone for the situation we are in except those who are apathetic.
Please read the article by Dr Kreeft.
Paul
Good Men? It is a fact that only 25-30% of Catholica attend Mass on Sunday’s; and they are not all men. This is to say that the pool of good men for Dioceses, Catholic Institutions, Religious Orders, For Good Catholic Girls. educators, etc.the pool of available good men is very small. Who is to blame? The Bishops who have not been Teacher’s and Shepard’s and are not doing much to bring back the 70-75& Catholics who left the Church. The future good men are coming from the homes of Home Schooler’s and orthodox academy’s. Anybody care to dispute my premises?
Ed
“How is the birth control pill used to control women?”
The pill gives people the mindset that they can have as much sex as they want without the fear of becoming a parent. Long-story-short, when the pill or condom fails, many men leave the woman because they do not want to be a father. As one young college man told me, “It’s not my fault she got pregnant. Why should I have to give up what I want because the pill did not work?” The pill also leads to more adultery (higher percentages by men, though the gap is closing), abortion (many women being persuaded by the men that got them pregnant), and other issues papers have been written on, so you can look those up if you wish. Also, note that all I did was answer your question here. Women have also used the pill as a means of using men.
“Regarding the breaking of the social contract, women do not have the total blame, but I am sorry, they have most of it by far. It is not men but women who have been pushing change in the relationship between the sexes for the last 60 years. I would be interested to know why you don’t see it this way.”
I have seen the damages of pornography and contraception, I have seen abandoned mothers and children. I have seen how women used sex in order to make boyfriends feel obligated to stay in a relationship or to make an ex jealous. I do not assess a greater blame to either side because I have seen how much each sex has hurt the other.
“There is something subtle in this statement that I suspect reflects your overall view of the matter, Dennis. You say men ‘need’ to be strong but wives ‘should’ allow their husbands to lead…. Demands for men, suggestions for women.”
You are assuming a different meaning of the word ‘should’ than I intended. The definition I used: used to indicate an obligation, duty, or correctness. Demands are made of both men and women.
“This parallels the fact that you although you have complained on women’s behalf, you have yet to say anything of the difficulties men face.”
Sorry, I did not realize you wanted a thesis on the subject. If you want to talk about the difficulties men face, I will be happy to.
“More to the point, in the above statement, it is all about the woman. Men need to be strong - for women, of course.”
Where did I say men needed to be strong for women? All I said is that men need to be strong. But this is for their own sake, as well as that of the women.
“Women need to let men lead - for their own sake, of course. It is always about the woman. At what point do we begin to consider the needs of men? What, for example, does the woman do for the man? Your comments are very much like others I’ve heard… everywhere else.”
I never said that a man is to lead for ONLY the woman’s sake. Why is a woman afraid to be ‘submissive’ in a relationship? Because she is scared of being taken advantage of. I brought up the point the way I did because if the man is a true man, the woman should not have that fear. At the same time, the man should be able to count on the woman treating him properly.
“I am beginning to think women are nothing but a complaining burden and that I myself am a persona non grata. Get angry with me if you want, Dennis, but I am telling you the truth. We are always marching to the same drumbreat - Women are never challenged. Women are all that matter. Men’s needs don’t matter. Men have to do this. Men have to do that. It’s really like that!”
I have no doubt that you are speaking from your experiences, but that makes it ‘the truth’ for you, not for everybody. I sincerely suggest you enlarge your circle of friends and reading materials. I personally know many woman who are looking for a man that will be the loving leader in their relationship, and have spoken to many more. Honestly, I was angry with you at first, but not any more. I am sad that things have happened to you that have caused this particular view of women, and I pray that you will meet people that will help you start to change that perception.
“You actually do speak to women as well about how they mistreat men? I have never heard anyone do this anywhere, period. Always the person tells us men what we’re doing wrong while the women smirk. I mean, really, I will be seriously impressed if you give a fair and balanced treatment to your students on this point, because if you do, it’s one in a million.”
Yes. I speak to women about things they do that emasculate men, their faulty expectations, games they play with men, and so on. I also talk to them about their worth and what they deserve. I do the same thing for the men: talk about how they use women and about their worth and what they deserve. That is why I was originally angry about your post: it was all tearing down, not building up.
“I really take exception to this. First, you have yet to acknowledge anything I’ve said about men. If you intend to ignore the needs and complaints of have the population, you do not really want a constructive conversation.”
My first response complimented you on succinctly addressing the problem. After that, I did not want to waste a lot of time writing something if you were simply going to always respond in anger. I am more than willing to talk about the needs and complaints of men.
“Second, if a woman had written a comment like mine, would you have corrected her for her lack of charity?”
I definitely would have. Everyone should be charitable, regardless of sex.
“Third, I am not going to apologize for my anger. It is real and there are reasons it exists.”
You may have a reason and a right to be angry, but ask yourself, are you using it to affect positive change or simply taking it out on others?
Whoa…this message is for David. Now I hope that you can please step away from your passionate and understandable views regarding women for just a moment. I am a woman, and though I can see the author’s point of view, I can also see yours. I try my best to take the most objective view regarding the relationships between men and women. We’re both at fault if we’re honest with ourselves. We as people are broken and we always will be until the Lord’s return. I was married for 18 years and have been divorced for 8. During these past 8 years I’ve chosen celibacy as opposed to dating and remarriage, because I needed to understand myself and where I went wrong before attempting to be honestly self-giving. I now have an incredibly huge respect for Sacramental Marriage (of which I did not have), and will only enter into if it be God’s will, not my own. You see, since I am broken and my potential spouse will also be broken, only the Holy Spirit through the Sacrament will be able to put both of our hearts in a place of what Pope John Paul II calls reciprocal self-giving, true oneness within spousal love. Only when we can come to a place where we abandon our personal “I” and stop focusing on getting “our own needs” met, can we truly find ourselves in our spouse and in so doing, find true fulfillment. The bible says he who loves his wife loves himself. The kind of love being talked about here is the sacrificial kind. The kind that Christ proved on the cross. That is the kind of love Christ expects from men toward their wives. The bible says “husbands, love your wives.” In turn, it says “wives, respect your husbands.”
We’ve lost your love, and you’ve lost our respect, and only in Christ can we ever hope to gain these graces back. Still, we’ve got to start somewhere, and that somewhere is in our own hearts. I’ve been studying JPII’s Theology of the Body. I highly recommend it for you specifically because it gives a very clear perspective of our roles as spouses to each other and to Christ. Love is the hardest thing to do. If you don’t agree, take another look at your crucifix. That’s the kind of man that women want, and admittedly do not deserve. Still, Christ’s example also reminds us that none of us deserve that kind of love, and yet his words to us were to love one another. Until I can love like that, I don’t deserve a real man. Until I do love like that, I don’t expect one to come along either. When I do love like that, I will trust the Lord to bring me the man he chooses for me, because in his timing is when we’ll both be ready. Consider reading the Holy Father’s book. It may soften your heart, help you to look on women with hopefully even a little bit of grace, maybe give you the wisdom to be a man a woman can hope for, and perhaps even give you hope that there is a woman somewhere who is deserving and respectful of you. It is my prayer for you, that you will find true oneness with the mate God has chosen for you, and that God will heal the bitterness that societal brokenness has caused in your heart. Society is a mess, but Christ heals all.
Pax brother,
Shannon
Dennis - I haven’t much to say in response to your comment. I agree with a lot that you said. Nevertheless, I stand by my earlier point: There is a tremendous cultural imbalance in the discussion of the relationship between the sexes, and it is grating. It is all about the women. If you are really as willing and unafraid to acknowledge women’s own responsibility for our current problems as you say you are, without pulling any punches, then as I said before, you are by far the exception, not the rule. I saw a small example of this pattern not long ago on Anthony Buono’s blog about dating and marriage. He wrote an article called, “Are Women Unappreciative?” It was a scandal: the women were infuriated. How dare he challenge them? Didn’t he know men were the cause of all the world’s problems? Now, I do not remember the last time Mr. Buono wrote an article that specifically addressed men, but I can tell you that he routinely challenges men in his articles; women not so much. Moreover, had he written an article calling men to better behavior, would there have been a furor? I think not. Some reasonable disagreement on minor points? Maybe. One or two whiners? Yeah, that could happen - not that the other men would let it go on for long. Fact is, I have seen many Catholic articles challenging men in strong terms (on the other hand, just the one article, mentioned above, doing the same with women, and of course it included the requisite sympathetic caveats: “I know, it’s so hard for you.”). And men, almost without exception, respond with gratitude and acknowledgment - “Yeah, that’s something we need to work on. Thanks, this is an area where I need improvement.” That the women, by contrast, responded badly to Anthony’s article I think only stems from the fact that they are just not used to being challenged directly. Even if you believe that men are to take greater responsibility for any problem in the relationship between the sexes, is it really good that we have brought our women to the point where they can’t stomach hearing any blame at all? Pardon me but I think we’ve spoiled them a bit. We don’t have to crush their souls but for crying out loud, they ought to be able to take a little criticism. They’re not that fragile!
.
Now that is one article, but it’s just to illustrate a pattern that I see replicated *everywhere* throughout the culture. Everywhere - in Catholic circles and out. In movies and television shows, for a more general example, the typical scheme for any close heterosexual relationship between characters involves the man having some serious flaw, the woman having not really any serious flaw at all, and her helping him to realize his failing and overcome it for the good of all. Now, there is nothing wrong with this scheme in itself. But when it is all that you see, and you only rarely see it reversed, what does it suggest? That men are bad and women are good. That men are - by nature - morally inferior to women. That history itself is the story of how good women made bad men good. (Why do they put up with us?) Now take this pattern and couple it with the feminist storyline that every boy for the last thirty or more years has grown up hearing and - well, I don’t know about you, Dennis, but I’m not surprised that I find men almost every day who feel guilty and ashamed just for being male, and who place women on pedestals. Personally, it has taken me a long time, a lot of hard work, and some rough experiences to de-program from this idiotic and destructive mythology. I’m surprised more people don’t get it. It’s not like I’m some genius! All of this is right in front of us every day.
.
This is why even a sanely, calmly, and reasonably written article like the above makes me want to projectile vomit. I am just sick and tired of hearing it. Do you see what I’m saying? Everywhere we go - everywhere - all we men hear from the culture is that we’re idiots, slobs, and failures; that women are just so mature (there’s a load of crap - “Eat, Pray, Love”, anybody?); that women really don’t do anything wrong, at least nothing that’s worth mentioning; that we’re lucky women still put up with us; and that men aren’t really people with wants and needs of their own that also deserve our serious consideration. No, we just hear what’s wrong with us. You talk about a constructive approach, Dennis. You know, if my lawn mower doesn’t work, I get my toolbox out and start poking around to see what’s wrong. That’s the only way I can fix it. If men are broken, we need to start seriously examining their lives and finding out what’s happening there. Currently, we don’t give a crap. We’d rather just keep ‘kicking the lawn mower’, so to speak, in order to make it work. Go to malestudies.com. They’re the only group I’ve ever found who get it. And they ain’t Catholic. The fact is that we just don’t give a rat’s you-know-what about men. Period.
.
And all this is why I think, when I hear the whining complaint, “Where are the good men?” - I think, “Duh. We’ve spent the last sixty years destroying men. They’re down for the count. And why should they come back for you, if you don’t care about them at all? Why should they make that sacrifice for you?” Yeah, I know Jesus died for us all, but not before He whooped some serious Pharisee butt and issued some stern challenges to all of us.
.
What I’m saying, Dennis, is that the whole cultural dialogue needs to find a new fulcrum. It’s completely off-balance and not at all constructive and though Catholic men may be willing to take on these challenges for the sake of Christ we should not imagine that other men will so willingly permit themselves to be used by a culture that has made it abundantly clear it simply does not give a damn about them.
Shannon - Thanks for your comment. I’m sorry to hear that your marriage ended in divorce but it sounds like you are taking a very constructive approach in the aftermath - digging in your heels, so to speak, and working hard to find Christ, and yourself in Him. Thank you also for your encouragement. You are very kind.
.
It’s been said of me on more than one occasion that I am angry because of personal experiences. I have had a couple of bad experiences with women, one extremely bad, and the other just kind of difficult - both women had severe personal issues. But to reduce my comments to these experiences is not fair. I do have my personal struggles but my comments about broader issues have merit.
.
I am not in a place right now to take on a tome like JPII’s Theology of the Body. A friend gave me a copy of Christopher West’s Introduction, but I didn’t find it that interesting (and honestly I had a hard time understanding where it was going - I guess I need the introduction to the introduction!). Also, I was put out right away by West’s preface, which included a lengthy apology on behalf of men to women for all the awful things we’ve done. (A lot of Catholic men are like that - good little boys who just want to apologize to Mommy. That’s harsh but it’s absolutely the truth.) I find that JPII, on the whole, is like that as well, though obviously in a more respectable way. For example, I do not find he had much to say to men about their value except, as you mentioned, “Get on that cross and die.” Meanwhile, he went on at length about the feminine genius. That’s great, and I understand the need to talk about that in this age of feminism, but, uh, we men are a little confused about ourselves too right now. Had our Holy Father nothing to say to us? Who are we? What are we for? Is it good to be male?
.
And, you know… you already noted that I’m bitter, and this is more of the same… but really? I have to die for my wife, and she just has to respect me? Seriously? No way, sister. No effing way.
.
You seem like you’re in a good place, and you know where you’re going. I hope you find the man you’re looking for. Thanks again for your kind words.
Paul - Yes, I’ve read that article before, and I appreciated the chance to read it again. Peter Kreeft has a way of getting to the heart of things. More to the point I think you are trying to make, the bottom line is that we are fighting a spiritual war first of all, and that the demons are our enemies. Everything else is secondary to this central struggle.
.
The thing is, though, Paul, there is hardly a decent Catholic out there who would not agree with Kreeft’s article, but who would nevertheless tend to think, if only by the sheer force of habit, in terms of the paradigm I mentioned (which I think I’ve still yet to flesh out fully here). It takes effort and awareness to break out of this paradigm. Again, anyone who doubts this should try writing an article calling women to do better with some fault that is common to their sex - do it even nicely and you might just get burned at the stake. On the other hand, write an article that simply examines men’s issues for their own sake and one of two things will happen: it will either get ignored or women will come along to complain about their own problems. That’s what happened when… a certain Mrs. Bean, of the Catholic blogosphere, wrote to express concern about the pain felt by unwittingly divorced dads. It was a pleasant and rare expression of solidarity by a woman toward men. Well, it wasn’t long before women came along to tell us about how bad their marriages were and how they were justified in divorcing their husbands. There wasn’t much talking about the pain of these fathers. The women made sure of it. No, it was going to be about them, come hell or high water.
.
A really good example of a woman who gets it, and gets it better than I do, is Laura Wood of The Thinking Housewife (.com). She’s quite a traditionalist (and I’m rather a traditionalist myself, for the record, though not quite so much as she), but what I mean to point out about her is that she understands that we are culturally reticent - well beyond the point of negligence - to criticize poor behavior in women, or to acknowledge men’s pain. She understands, and will tell you better than I can, that this is a major cultural blind spot for us. She can be a little too hard on women sometimes, and a little too easy on men, but I think she would tell you herself this is only her effort to correct an imbalance in perception.
It’s as simple as this: women want respect from men. We want respect and appreciation for the things that make us different from you…..but we don’t always know how to go about earning it. Equality doesn’t necessarily mean “the same”. Be nice, David. We try. :-)
Hi, Rose: My respect for every woman who is trying.
David - I think we are beginning to understand the other, and I really appreciate the way you wrote your response.
.
I did not read Mr. Buono’s blog, but have read similar blogs, some challenging men and some challenging women. But I agree that the articles challenging the men, in the sample I have read, outnumber those for the women. I also find myself frustrated with the overwhelming theme of songs, movies, and T.V. that depict the ‘strong woman and goofy/incompetent guy’. A woman who leaves the guy or gives an ultimatum in order to pursue a career or another relationship is depicted as “independent” and “not settling”. A man who leaves a woman or gives an ultimatum for the same reasons is depicted as a “jerk”. My concern is that the fulcrum you are trying to use is one that is almost as bad as the current one. The paradigm shift you have been using in most of your comments is one of: “Women are hypocrites. Women are selfish. Women are stupid. I’m done with caring about women.” Instead of raising manhood up as a thing to be respected by both men and women, you seem to be trying to bring womanhood down. I think an issue that has to be addressed in all of this is that BOTH men and women are being lied to about what it means to be a man and what it means to be a woman. God created both man and woman as wonderous beings, and it does no good to deny this. Perhaps this was not your intention, but this is how it was coming across.
.
So how do we address this issue? I think it has to be in a way that elevates both masculinity and femininity to their God-given heights. What has happened in the world is that the idea of a sexual differentiation and complementarity has become equivalent to sexism. To say that certain qualities are generally found more in one sex or the other is wrongly taken to imply that one sex is inferior in dignity to the other. In this worldview, “equality” is now viewed as “sameness”. In the past, it has been the men who have had the world’s definition of “power”. So in order to gain “equality,” there was and is a push for women to get more and more “power”. The problem is that the world’s definition of “power” and how to use it is different than God’s. Until we are able to correct this thinking, what we are experiencing in this world will continue. That is why when I talk to men and women, I always include the dignity of their gender and God’s idea of what “leadership” and “submissiveness” mean, especially as seen in Ephesians. What do you think?
.
Also, as Shannon said, the Theology of the Body is a wonderful way to address these things. It can seem confusing or silly if looked at through a tinted lens, but it is a beautiful message. If you would like some help understanding certain aspects, I will be happy to do my best in aiding you. I can even give you my personal e-mail address if you would prefer to do it outside of the comboxes.
Shannon and Rose, thank you for contributing. It definitely helps to have a woman’s perspective, and is extra helpful when it is done in a positive way. Men need to hear things like your insights because as David said, it can be confusing being a man (I’m sure you do not have that issue as women :-), and extra confusing when the messages you see and hear in the media are contrary to what you sense in your very being as a man.
Back to David:
I understand where you are coming from. Maybe I have blacked that kind of thing out. I have got to the point now where I ignore almost everything in so-called popular culture full stop, never mind the stupid stereotypes that are presented by various sitcoms, movies and so on.
I do realise that there is a culture war going on that particularly attacks men in certain ways but I have tended to see that as just one facet of an overall culture war. I know that when a man for example tells a woman or dares to write an article that questions for example the modesty of the majority of women out there will get jumped on.
But that is just par for the course because most women do not know how to dress modestly. When it is pointed out some woman will try and say men are being unfair and that men need to be modest themselves. It is stupid because any faithful catholic man who points immodesty out will and should be dressing properly himself. I really do not think that the majority of women have even the beginning of a clue the effect immodesty has on a man - especially one who is young. What is worrying is that effect this has on a teenager swamped with hormones is almost a non-concern to these women who insist on dressing this way.
However I cannot bring myself to get annoyed or angry at this any more. I just feel pity for them in the same way I feel pity for a child dying of AIDS out in Africa. They just do not understand what they are doing. How can you see the ignorant any other way?
As regards the popular culture once again - just write it all off as poison which it is and you will cease to worry. Just be a man yourself and pray for a holy woman to come your way.
God Bless
Paul
Dennis:
.
“My concern is that the fulcrum you are trying to use is one that is almost as bad as the current one. ... Instead of raising manhood up as a thing to be respected by both men and women, you seem to be trying to bring womanhood down.”
.
Well, you’ve cornered me here, Dennis: I wrote my first comment poorly. That is true. In fact, I’m pretty embarrassed by the harsh things I said. I apologize to any woman whom I hurt with my comments. Clearly, I’ve some weeds still to pull from the garden. (Till/guard) It is true that we must dedicate ourselves to following Christ. Whatever we may face - and certainly we are not the first to face difficult circumstances - we cannot lose this aim. And in accordance with that aim, we must strive for what is best in every difficulty. I’ve certainly lost sight of that and though my first comment was quite rude, I am, for my own sake, glad that I wrote it, because each of you has helped me through your own words to come back to the starting point, which of course is always Christ.
.
I’m no expert on these issues by any stretch but I thought your comments were on point, Dennis. Yes, it’s necessary to communicate what leadership and submission mean in Christianity, because the way we use these words is quite different from the way the broader culture uses them. Getting at your point about power - just imagine what a different world we would have if everyone understood power as nothing more than a tool that one uses in the service of others, rather than one’s self.
.
Thanks for offering to help with the Theology of the Body. I’m not sure I can make much time for that right now, but here is my e-mail address - .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Maybe we can correspond again one day and discuss these matters further.
.
Paul: I really agree with you about modesty. It really doesn’t seem like women understand just how… affecting the sight of their bodies can be. This was illustrated well for me when I was reading a blog one day - haha, can you tell I spend too much time on the ‘Net? - in which the author, a woman, presented a picture of a young, attractive girl wearing very short shorts and a low-cut shirt. The author said she went to a bar one summer night dressed like this and that she was both surprised and hurt when the men there treated her like she was a ‘slut’ (which really means, of course, sexually available). Meaning, they all wanted one-night stands and whatever. She said she only thought her outfit was cute - and I’m sure it did look that way to her. Now, I’m not suggesting she deserved to be treated disrespectfully, but it does go to show you how differently the sexes can see these things. Not only were the men aroused by her, so that they wanted to have sex with her, but in their eyes, her manner of dress communicated willingness and availability. I know you and I both understand this is exactly how these things seem to us men, at least on… say… a biological level, or something like that. I have heard women protest that they also find men dressed in shorts or tight pants arousing, but I still have the impression on the whole that it’s quite a different story between the sexes on the subject of modesty, even if modesty is incumbent on both. Thus, when women insist on their right to dress however they want, it can seem very insensitive and callous to our sex. This is part of the theme I was stressing earlier - men’s needs aren’t quite important, at least not alongside women’s demands.
.
As an aside, another example of that theme occurs to me now: male-only associations. Many of those were eliminated or at least infiltrated when women cried ‘sexist’. Whether it would harm men to deprive them of spaces where they could form friendships with other men without women around was the last thing on anybody’s mind. Where men’s needs are pitted against women’s demands, men lose. Certainly women understand the importance of forming same-sex friendships in the absence of the opposite sex - they do this all the time and they do it very well. Unfortunately, it is the segment of women who have power who believe it is not important that men have this life-giving place where they can grow as men. It is hard not to wonder whether a certain group of people are not actually trying to destroy us. Divide and conquer? Call me paranoid, but it looks that way sometimes. The point is: when women raise their voices, men back down, especially on the political level. As men really do have needs, this is not good for anybody.
.
As for your thoughts on dealing with the culture, I see what you’re saying and I don’t. On the one hand, there is only so much any one of us can do - and that is very little indeed, compared to the magnitude of the problem. Dennis certainly does what he can. I do less: I only rant on the Internet. :-) Certainly we cannot afford to lose our own peace, much less our integrity, about the circumstances we have been given to face. I do think we have to do something, though, Paul; it would be a shame if the Catholic voice was the only one that dropped out of the cultural exchange. I guess my view is that we should try to build something positive and constructive within our own spheres of influence, as Dennis does.
Misogyny doesn’t solve the issue. I married a Lutheran. Twenty years later, and her behavior is quite Catholic in terms of respect of the marital bond. She has stood behind me (and in front of me, when needed) in good times and bad. I have done the same for her. At least, I hope I have.
The current issue is one of self-worship that is a characteristic not of the sexes, but of a society in which narcissism is the order today. The philosophy is not “I’m OK, you’re OK,” but “I’m OK, and you don’t matter, except as you matter to me.”
It has nothing to do with men and women per se. They will never “understand” each other, but that doesn’t mean they can’t work for each other, and that’s what marriage entails - work. Wake up each morning, look at your spouse and pray “God, I love you, may I show that love in my life for you today and every day.” That daily prayer is assaulted by the realities of daily life in rearing your children, and facing the temptation of a self-absorbed nation, so it is necessary every day. It doesn’t solve marital issues, or guarantee peace and harmony, but it keeps what’s important in your mind. It is all too easy to lose sight of that importance in this age.
Marriage with the idea that divorce is an option makes divorce inevitable.
David: I have e-mailed you at your address. You are absolutely right that we need to form relationships with other men in order to help build each other up and be examples of manhood (iron sharpens iron). This is especially true with brothers in Christ, for we are in the battle so well described by Dr. Kreeft.
Tom: I agree with your comments up to a point. The problem has to deal more with society at-large, and men and women address the new worldview differently, hurting each other and their own sex along the way. My wife wants me to mention that she and I also share the Catholic view of the marital bond, and it is a beautiful thing.
I do not in any way encourage Catholics to stop talking in our environments. I am simply saying that we ignore the vast majority of unhelpful things. So for example you lose nothing by never turning on comedy central or refusing to watch violent movies or whatever.
Just be selective.
Paul
“So for example you lose nothing by never turning on comedy central.”
Amen. This is as sure as the Law of Gravity.
@ David
“And, you know… you already noted that I’m bitter, and this is more of the same… but really? I have to die for my wife, and she just has to respect me? Seriously? No way, sister. No effing way.”
I’m a woman, and I do see where you are coming from on this. I think it’s easy to take things to the extreme (husband = dying for wife, wife = respecting husband), but as Christians who are made equally (but differently!) in the image of God, we are really supposed to be laying our lives down for one another - women and men. In a husband-wife relationship, it might look different than in a simple friendship, but the fact is, both parties are to be Christ to one another. The way in which this is done is going to be as distinct as the number of individuals in the world. The sacrifice required of both husbands and wives in marriage is very real. Without putting a knife in the heart of chivalry, I think it is safe to say that both husbands and wives ought to love their spouses enough to die for them.
(This is merely a personal opinion, and a gross generalization at that, but I think that deep down every woman desires a man who loves her enough to be willing to lay down his life for her, without him actually having to! Just like every man desires a woman who is willing to follow him anywhere. There is a similarity in the human longing for love that is expressed differently in both the two sexes and in indiviudals themselves.)
(PS: I LOVE JP II’s work on the “genius of women” but I also agree that he is tough on men and didn’t have too much to say about their particular gifts. I’ve read his work and I think there are some real hidden gems about men in there, but his general emphasis was (as is always the case), in response to the situation of his day (feminism). There are some authors who are now beginning to point out that little boys are the ones now being discriminated against in our society, and I think they are really on to something. {See “The Decline of Males” and “The War Against Boys.”} As Christians, we need to uphold and protect the dignity of both sexes.)
Well, I get it that men do become men in order to achieve sex… And in social life, most men become honourable in public just to prove that point. So, in that case, the most attractive women get the best treatement in the world.
“David, for the last 60 years, many men have been using the birth control pill to control women, having nothing but a utilitarian regard for them. Blaming the breaking of the social contract on women is inaccurate and unjust.”. It’s strange but I find it hard to identify with the concept of a generalised feminine outside of so-called feminists, so the spiritual solopsism of which they stand accused here is something with which I cannot agree. In a way, we are all solopsistic by virtue of our flawed interior lives, and our boundless selfishness. Nonetheless, it is women who fought for the Pill so they would have the “right to say Yes”, according to germaine Greer, subsequently and resultingly losing the right to say ‘No’. The Pill, the Great Deceiver. Lost lives, aborted generations. As a Psychiatrist, I feel sorry, very sorry, for the young women who come into me day after day suffering with the psychosocial depression of people lost in a world without directions, accompanied by men with even less directions, several generations later. When I read “Emotional Intelligence” 10 years ago and saw that it was a multi-million best-seller in the U.S., I was astonished because E.I. was to me in Ireland simply “common sense”. Well, I’m sorry to say that a decade later, the common sense is no longer common. Nor is the the common decency. Nor is the valued “manhood”. But I can honestly say, and I’m sure most will agree, that even among the most modern, a “gentleman"is still a clearly identifiable species, and people will comment admiringly so. May the Good Lord Help us all to emulate St. Joseph, and then the women of the world will have no need for complaint.
I am sick of hearing men say “we men can’t be men anymore because women have gotten the upper hand.” Please. If that’s the case, then maybe you should stop and think about how it felt for women all those years when men were telling them what to do, what to wear, controlling their money, etc? Not so fun. That’s why women got mad. But guess what? We can all live as individuals. It’s not a matter of who bosses whom. If men think we have to go back to the “good old days” in order for them to be masculine again, then masculinity isn’t what it’s cracked up to be. But i believe God has called both men and women to be strong and courageous, and that when we point to some condition in our present culture and say “that’s why I can’t be good,” we are missing the point that we are supposed to be strong AND HOLY, right now, in this culture, complete with whatever annoyances or temptations it has to offer.
David: there are many things I could say, but the most important would be:
a) yes, on a gross, statistical level, you have good points about the relationship between the sexes, BUT
b) the bad attitudes get—by far—the most attention in the media.
c) Thus there are many, many fine men and women who completely reject the poison served to them as “modern” gender interaction.
I pray that God will bless you with His joy and peace.
Blessings,
-Chris
@Rebecca - Which of us said that?
Men must stop blaming women for their deficiences (and visa versa). We are all responsible for our own actions. Read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”, and do your best to adhere to it.
How many men (and their Sons) have volunteered to be trained for serving Mass at their Parish?
How many men are leaders or true partners in leading their family to God?
Both Men and Women must ignore the media and other outside influence to live according to God’s will. When judgement day comes for each of us, there will be no excuses -the TV or internet made me do it !
I recommend that you all read and meditate on “Love and Responsibility” by Karol Wojtyla (Pope JPII). Very enlightening.
I didnt read all comments…but Im so impressed that guys like David actually read the National Catholic Register! Keep reading!
Hey, buddy, I’ve not figured out how you can subscribe www http://tiny.cc/2rl3sw
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.