Well, the spectacle of the Superbowl 2013 happened last night. I love the game. I even own a well-worn terrible towel…but I have to say this was one of the most disappointing, disturbing, and vacuous mega-sports and media events of recent memory.
I don’t have my thoughts worked out for an intelligent reflection and commentary, but I was referred to this article by Matthew Vos and it’s worth your time to read it, especially if you are a parent:
The way we consume iconic national events like the Super Bowl better depicts what we really believe about women than does anything else. For in the invisibility of normality, there we find our idolatry. [February 1, 2013 – By Matthew Vos]
misandry |misˈandrē| noun the hatred of men by women
ORIGIN 1940s: from Greek miso- ‘hating’ + anēr, andr- ‘man,’ on the pattern of misogyny.
As promised, I’m covering the female side of misogyny, which is misandry. I call this type of article a “BOOM post”. You have been warned.
I would be remiss to not admit that sectors of feminism are strongholds of misandry. Feminism, though, as many women think of it, is far more general. It has to do with equitable treatment toward women, in business, home life, society in general, and it hinges on the ability, explicitly or implicitly, to have choice (of many kinds) as a basic unalienable right. A wiser person, female or male, will understand, however, that freedom of choice must be balanced with one’s community, not rooted or executed from a selfish starting point.
It seems to me that troubles for either gender will stem from control issues. For men, it may be that they feel somehow impotent in their life, interactions, career path, health, etc. Perhaps the feeling or appearance of weakness is the pivot point.
For women, it may be that they want to be regarded well, and cherished (and I don’t mean in simply an emotional, or fuzzy way. This is more of a cherished at an essential level of being for (female) human flourishing). They want to not feel objectified (which, is disregard), or to relegated to a small box, i.e. a narrow role, a low ceiling limiting personal or career pursuits, an intellectual prejudice.
I find it interesting that body image plays a powerful role for both men and women. Ill-health, lack of fitness, the effects of aging, being fashionable, and certainly other issues influence personal issues of self-worth, emotionally and bodily. They also influence how each gender reacts to the other. Those things hated, or feared in one’s self will be trigger points and irritations all too glaringly visible in the other gender. Spite develops.
I will cover some ways misandry happens among women. Please note I use the word among purposefully, because there seems to be an execution of misandry in a social capacity more than in any other way. For men, they may both take their misogyny on as a personal war, and they may find strength in numbers, but women may tend towards a “team strategy”.
For women, physical aggression with misandry is not normative. Rather, it is mental, social, and tactical. Bullying of other female by female happens this way as well. The tendency may to manipulate, rather than misogynistic tendency to (in some respect) conquer or master (perhaps with resources, people, money, intellectual pursuits, empire, and including areas of competencies and skills). (I’m speaking quite generally, please bear with me.) Women seem more socially powerful, while men seem more dominant. Perhaps a good analogy is to say influential in contrast to jurisdictional.
For some general information, I will note 6 areas ripe for, or given to misandry. (Please note that these same areas are ones of great good, effectuality, and ministry if they are not perverted by selfishness and sin. Yes, the same goes for males.) Steps should be taken to purify and strength these venues through the Holy Spirit, and his Fruit, not disable or disband them.)
1. Gossip as bonding.
2. “Tribal Culture” (if you will) of malcontent.
3. A “sick clique” (more on this is a later post) It has to do with venting, fault finding, griping. For men, the counterpart might be verbal attacks or passive aggression. But, this also can and does happen with females.
4. Platforming (A leader or leaders pumping up/motivating a like-minded group)
5. Subversion of Systems (rather than negotiation)
6. Rebellion (overt or covert/and sometimes unintentionally) to authority, powerful groups, institutions, concepts, norms in question.
Often man-hating patterns are established in the context of a social group norm. There may be a retaliation tenor, as well. A pecking order type of culture may subtly and socially pressure its affiliates to employ a particular attitude. Acceptance in the group will be linked to the propagation and use of this structure, and its attitudes. Bear in mind, unlike many times with males, this all happens as sub-context, and is almost always implied, not vocalized.
(There are others areas. I welcome your additions, or specific ideas or comments on them.)
To expose the flaws and missteps among women is to set myself up as an enemy of women, and undermine some of the great and vital gains women have made societally to achieve appropriate equality. Quite a few people, whether they will admit it, or not, believe a certain amount of misandry seems justifiable because of humanity’s long history of abuse and antipathy toward the female gender. In recent, postmodern times, the female voice (or story), as well as many other historically-marginalized groups, has been given new validity and attention.
It is not my intent, of course to sabotage any positive and rightful gains for females. I do believe these rectifications have been sorely overdue, and really have not yet been accomplished. And what a sad commentary on the Christian assimilation of the ministry of Christ, and the human expression of the redemptive nature of the gospel.
To women, I say, we can be secure and mature enough to take on and strength whatever weaknesses we may have that are causing injury of harm to the body of Christ. We can work toward a better way, healing, and unity. As for you males, please read this all compassionately, and let it help you understand women’s weaknesses and strengths better. There is responsibility that comes with know more, so I trust you to use this new knowledge for good not evil.
I mention all of this, not to divide any of us from each other, or to give us weapons to beat each other with, but rather to call out areas of potential growth. Then, we can call them into question ourselves (men and women), confess before God, humble ourselves to each other in love and service, and work toward unity, reconciliation, and enacting God’s glorious Kingdom Come. God transcends gender, and our petty hang ups and weaknesses. It is in God’s strength and grace that we may be fashioned as new creatures that reflect God’s good character and nature.
I would have loved to make this whole article somehow more jocose (or humorous at all), because that’s usually how I roll, but I couldn’t switch gears, adapt and integrate that writing style on this one. Don’t expect such seriousness in any following installments on this, or any topic. (There’s only so much of this trajectory I can take, before I have to insert more cheer.) :)
Rachel Evans is calling for a response to Marck Driscoll’s recent bullying of effeminate men, here: But I have to mention….doesn’t this sound a lot like an episode of GLEE?
Does this gay bully look like Mark Driscoll?“macho man: Mark Driscoll” Wait! Is that a flattering blouse?
Mark Driscoll is gay? Don’t kill the messenger…I didn’t come up with this.
You can find a pretty solid case HERE, compiled from his friend Don Miller, who–years ago–coined him, “the cussing pastor” in his best-selling book Blue Like Jazz. (When I say “case”…I mean Donald seems to refer to Driscoll, with some detail, right along with [other] male leaders associated with…well, gay scandals. Maybe it’s a connect-the-dots thing.)
Another person to recently point out Mark’s hyper (and perhaps suspicious) masculinity, is Brett McCracken, within the pages of his new book Hipster Christianity, (pages 103-105.)
“There is a strong drift toward the hard theological left. Some emergent types [want] to recast Jesus as a limp-wrist hippie in a dress with a lot of product in His hair, who drank decaf and made pithy Zen statements about life while shopping for the perfect pair of shoes. In Revelation, Jesus is a prize fighter with a tattoo down His leg, a sword in His hand and the commitment to make someone bleed. That is a guy I can worship. I cannot worship the hippie, diaper, halo Christ because I cannot worship a guy I can beat up.” –Mark Driscoll [4]
(There’s a common theme of guy-on-guy fights/violence with Driscoll. You may remember he showed, the hot and sweaty brawl movie “Fight Club” as an official church event. Hum.)
Is Mark Driscoll’s Jesus Tough and Buff?
Mark, if you’re reading this, you can stop over-doing it to throw us off track. Don and I both realize you’ve painted yourself into a corner, Mark. The gig is up, dude.
(A bit like gay twins?) Driscoll and Gay WWF wrestler “Giant Gonzales” (Both picts are just so creepy. Sorry about that.)
Nevertheless. IF Driscoll was gay, we would love him anyway. Right, everyone? Right?
There’s a punchline in here somewhere. Can you spot it?
Is Mark Driscoll too overtly macho, and (like recent pastors caught in self-created sexual hypocrisy -Eddie Long and Ted Haggard), too anti-gay to be straight? (This is where you start to realize how silly the whole topic is.)
Disclaimer:
Am I joking about Driscoll? Sure. Of course. I’m a humorist. (I’m upfront about that here at the blog.) And despite loads of circumstantial evidence, and the writing stylings of Don Miller, Mark’s certain proclivity could remain a mystery, much like Theodicy, or atonement theories. This is all probably just a loooong series of coincidences. No biggie. If Mark is gay, or tempted with homosexual thoughts or feelings, I’m sure we could trust that he’d just open up and tell us–straight out. Or, maybe, like his marriage book, he’ll hold out on telling us that he’s had some trouble until he writes a book on the topic. I”m honestly NOT worried about it. The point is, neither should any of us be!
A most famous depiction of God the Father by Michelangelo
Here, just the Father’s beard could wipe out planet Earth
A Family of God chat. Dove is like a weird pet, and Jesus still shoulders the cross
Flying Father God hovers in parallel maneuver with Spirit Dove. Gosh-Nice jammies for Jesus, Mary! Just rub it in why don’t you.
I have a body, you have a body, and…..
we’ve gotten used to God (the Father) having one too. “The Man Upstairs” We’ve heard this dysphemism, right?
This almighty person* of the three-in-one Godhead, who is the center of Reality, is the One Jesus invited us to respectfully, personally, and literally, address as “Dad” in our prayers.
Yep, this is probably why the male depictions crop up. And, it’s not surprising that since God has been around for quite a while (okay. That is hyperbole….it’s been forever and ever) that he would be depicted as elderly. There’s the white hair, wrinkles, and, of course mad skillz at wisdom etched in the contours of his face. He’s usually shown as robed (relaxed fit clothing , perhaps), light-skinned (really huge shock, right? Thanks, Rome.), and bearded. There’s a verse about Jesus having the hair in his beard ripped out, but God the Father having a beard, well, maybe he’s just too busy to shave? Did famous Greek Stoics look like this, so it was a jumping off point for artists? God, so many questions…
AND-Yes, curiously the depictions appear very much like Father Christmas (Santa Claus). If you think about that bit for too long, it will start to get creepy; especially with those holiday songs that include lines, “he sees you when your sleeping…” and such.
Here’s the part where I pop the fantasy bubble, like it or not.
God is not a man.
God does not have a body.
“He” isn’t “upstairs”.
That deity in art, and in our minds, looks like a human, and acts as such. It’s human created. The street term sadly, I’m sorry to say, this is, an idol. There, I said it.
More importantly to our spiritual growth, those types of pictures of God are bitty and short-changed. God does not have body parts, or biology to make God one or another gender. Jesus, and others may say “he” for God because it is a term of relationship. It is a gift of grace, goodness, and love toward us (as children) that no human father can accomplish perfectly well. But God can. God displays qualities most often distinctive to both genders respectively, and in perfection and holiness.
God is everywhere. Let’s just try to wrap our brains around this a bit, because we are not at all everywhere. I’ll just repeat it: God is everywhere. This is one big benefit a Spirit Being has, someone like “the man upstairs” is only, well, upstairs. And sometimes downstairs, but not both at the same time. This is where Deism is straight out against the Trinitarian percepts of the Bible. Deism, separates God from his creation: God-The Watchmaker. Distant, Aloof. It’s just dead wrong, because Jesus called him Father, and invited us to do so, too.
To perform an act of God in the flesh (in human form) Perfect God needed a body. So, yes, God incarnated a real human body to heal and redeem humans, body and spirit.
That incarnation: Jesus, the Anointed One.
The Holy Spirit, also a full member of the three-in-one Godhead (not just a pale bird in flight above a placid, pasty, bearded white guy often seen in artistic depictions), is the full power of God that is with us who receive God and Jesus. This Being, works on us to teach us, and transform us into Jesus’ character, what we call “Christ-likeness”.
In a recent survey, Two out of Three members of the Trinity prefer being body-free.
From Jesus, written by John in Chapter 4. Verse 23 “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”
*(person here does not signify a human person (i.e. human individual), but instead, one with a personality. personality |ˌpərsəˈnalitē|noun ( pl. -ties)1 the combination of characteristics or qualities that form an individual’s distinctive character). In mystic tradition there is some issue there too.
Now it’s your turn.
Like me, have you ever thought of God the Father as a man? Or an old man in the sky?
Or a Being with a body?
How do you image or imagine God?
Which artistic depiction of God (shown above) do you find the strangest, or most fascinating?
