Grieving Victims of Violence

I am grieving this week for a young woman I never met. I have been grieving for her since I first heard the story of her brutal rape at the hands of several men on December 16 and subsequent death from her injuries at the end of the year. I grieve because no person should endure the abuse that she received. I grieve because her life was just as precious to God as any other human and her loss diminishes all of us, to recall the words of John Donne. When I think of her I see all the women I have the privilege of knowing and shudder at the thought that any of them should face what she did.

I grieve as well because her death does not stand as an isolated act. Although her abuse was particularly awful in its brutality, rape has been and remains a common occurrence in India. Perhaps this heinous crime will spur changes in Indian society, but some of the comments I have read make me doubt this. These comments sound all too familiar, placing the blame on women for their appearance or behaviour, effectively making the victim responsible for her own abuse. It seems that men in India, at least many of them, have a very difficult time accepting women as their equals. Feeling threatened by women in the public space, they shame them, demean them, abuse them, rape them and seek to exert control over them to maintain their superior position in the culture. I recognize that not all men in India are this way, but from the many stories that have come out of India in light of this crime, these characteristics seem to provide an accurate profile of the culture as a whole.

I grieve not only because of the culture of violence toward women that we find in India. I grieve also because this same culture of violence exists in my own country. We in America may feel some sense of cultural superiority to India, but we shouldn't, because women face similar threats of violence, rape, abuse and even death at the hands of men here in the United States as well. We are not innocent. We are not better than they are. In fact we are just as guilty as India of excusing violent behavior by men. As I wrote recently, we falsely continue to affirm this as part of masculinity. We men (and women, who unfortunately sometimes perpetuate the same lies and myths about rape victims as men) need to stand against violence, particularly against women. We need to affirm that being a “real” man doesn't require asserting power and control over women. Quite the opposite. We need to demonstrate by word and deed that men are fully men when they embrace gentleness, humility and kindness and surrender power and control. Instead of feeling threatened by the equality of women, we need to embrace and affirm it, for in affirming their full dignity and equality we benefit all of society, including ourselves.

We also need to leave behind false myths and ideas that place the blame for rape and abuse on women because of their appearance or behaviour. Men who rape bear the responsibility for their behaviour, not their victims. Unfortunately the modesty myth so frequently perpetuated in Christian circles does nothing to reduce or eliminate this false blaming. Men and women in the church need to take the lead in defending the victims of violence and abuse instead of turning the blame back on them. We, the people of God, should be the trendsetters against violence in any form. I grieve that we often lag far behind or, worse still, perpetuate false gender stereotypes along with modesty and purity myths. By doing so we are complicit in the culture of rape and violence that exists in this country and around the world.

I hope that this young woman's death will bring change to Indian society. I hope it does not stop with India though, but can be a catalyst to further the reduction and eventual elimination of violence against women in every country. We must speak out. We must stand against violence toward women. We must adopt a new view of manhood that affirms the full equality and dignity of women. We cannot remain complicit in the abuse, mistreatment, rape and other forms of violence against women.

Masculinity and Violence

In light of the recent tragedy in Connecticut we have seen the usual heated discussion about gun control flare up again. We've also seen some conversation about mental health issues. We need to talk about both of these topics and I certainly have my own thoughts on each of them. But we've seen very little conversation about another key issue: the role of violence in our society and how we socialize ourselves, especially boys, in such a way that violence becomes a natural, even expected, expression of masculinity.

Our culture promotes the idea that being a man means taking charge, getting what you want, exerting power and control. We see this in movies and on TV. I was just at the movie theater and was appalled though not surprised by the predominance of weapons and violence – largely led by men – in current and upcoming films. We see it particularly in video games, where it combines with blatantly misogynistic memes that denigrate and degrade women. (I'm looking forward to Anita Sarkeesian's video on this subject.) We tacitly and even explicitly affirm it in the messages we give to our boys and young men. We condone violence as a solution to problems and yet are surprised when people act violently outside of the ways we deem “acceptable.” As tragic as the killings in Connecticut are, they are only an extreme example of the fact that American culture has embraced and celebrates violence. Among nations with similar socio-economic levels, our country has one of if not the highest level of murder, the majority of which are carried out by men. Domestic violence plagues our society. Men abuse, mistreat and denigrate women and yet we all-too-quickly excuse such immoral behavior saying, “Boys will be boys.” Even worse, we turn the blame back onto the very victims of this abuse and violence, saying that they should have done X differently in order to not stimulate or provoke men. Our concept of masculinity and our devotion to inaccurate and outdated gender stereotypes contributes to the culture of violence in which we live.

Masculinity in our society has come to be defined largely as a rejection of anything deemed “effiminate.” This includes any expression of empathy, gentleness and compassion. We teach boys that physical weakness correlates to moral weakness and inferiority. Boys understand from an early age that the most physically attractive and strong boys are the most respected. Our sports culture reaffirms this not only during school years but into adulthood as well. We affirm certain colors, clothing, and behavioral traits as “feminine,” and we mock and deride any man or boy who should express a liking for or interest in them, once again reinforcing gender stereotypes that have no real basis.

We also train boys that they should expect to be in charge of their world. This has a reasonable side in so far as it promotes personal responsibility for our choices and actions. But in our society we go well beyond that and promote the idea that men are natural leaders while women are naturally passive followers. Unfortunately we hear this particularly in our churches, where we affirm the value of women as long as they remain in their “proper” spheres of activity and influence. But when a young man finds that he cannot control his environment or those around him, we express surprise that he lashes out in violence, seeking to destroy or harm that which he cannot control.

We need to change our whole perception of what it means to be a real man. We must teach our boys and men that expressing themselves through violence is not a healthy outlet, nor does it make them more “manly.” We should encourage them to embrace the value of empathy, gentleness and compassion. We must stop thinking of and referring to these qualities as “feminine” because this gender-labeling only promotes a false understanding of what manhood is all about, as well as continuing to denigrate anything associated with women as inferior. Caring for and valuing others are not qualities that we should expect only in women, nor are they inferior characteristics..

The apostle Paul writing to the Colossian church said:

As God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.

He didn't write these words just to the women in the community. He wrote them to everyone. Compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience are manly. Well, actually they are neither manly nor womanly, they are godly characteristics. Let's move away from the whole idea that certain qualities as masculine or feminine and affirm those proclaim and uphold the worth and value of all humans.

We men need to radically rethink what it means to be a man. We need a new image and understanding of masculinity that doesn't promote exerting power and control over others, that doesn't denigrate compassion, kindness and humility, that doesn't glorify violence as the solution to problems. Our current limited view of masculinity fails to prepare men to treat others with respect and dignity. It robs us of our own worth and dignity as well by dictating that real men have to act in certain, stereotyped ways in order to not be perceived as “effiminate” as if that in and of itself were somehow bad.

Men, we need to have this conversation. Our response to a tragedy such as the one at Sandy Hook should not be limited just to questions of gun control or even mental health issues. Let's use this as an impetus to redefine manhood, letting go of power, control and violence and embracing humility, compassion and gentleness. Let's stop robbing ourselves of half (or more) of our humanity. Let's teach ourselves and our sons that there is a different, better way to live.

Women, you also have a key role in redefining masculinity. As mothers, wives, sisters, friends and in every other way in which you interact with men, you either affirm and perpetuate the dominant truncated view of masculinity, or you support those who strive to redefine it in healthier, more wholistic ways -- the unguys we might call them. We need you to tell men that manliness does not lie in physical strength, in control and dominance, in the suppression of all emotions other than anger. Many of you are doing this and I appreciate that. But too often the message of false masculinity is proclaimed and upheld not only by the men of our culture, but by the women as well. We must work together to change this.

I recommend this thought-provoking article as well as this one by Soraya Chemaly for further reflection on this topic. She also gives many links to other articles for further exploration of this important subject.

A Call to Men

How does our male-dominated, "man-up" oriented culture affect both men and women? This video from Tony Porter provides some great food for thought and discussion.

Ideal Men or Real Men?

There is a lot of healthy conversation going on about how women are portrayed in the media, much of it spearheaded by the Miss Representation campaign. My perspective is being reshaped as I educate myself and look more critically at films, television shows, books and magazines.


But, some may say, what about men? Aren't we being overlooked in all this? Well, not really. Men are still the ones who hold power and who determine most of what the media portrays. The attitude of men toward women is a key part of the problem, so we also need to be part of the solution by changing the way we view and depict women and by speaking out against biased, inaccurate and prejudical portrayals of women wherever we find them.


Another aspect of the problem, one that is less addressed, is the way men are depicted in media. We too suffer from unrealistic and prejudical images of what it means to be a man. Take a moment and watch this video:





I don't know about you, but I can relate to what she is saying. I certainly don't fit the "ideal" male image. Thankfully I have a wife who loves me despite my lack of ripped muscles and stunningly handsome good looks. I can't say that I've thought too much about this, but I do know that I have spent most of my life feeling like I wasn't "man" enough. I'm not particularly gifted athletically. I'm pretty inept with most construction tools. I'm not physically strong. So when society keeps telling me through various channels that this is what it means to be a "real" man, I see myself as a failure. Unfortunately the Church hasn't done me any favors in this area either. They may add to the categories, such as a "real" man has to be an ideal husband and father, but so much of the chatter coming out of the so-called biblical manhood camp simply reiterates the message of the world in defining manliness.


As I reach mid-life I am slowly coming to accept myself for the man that I am. I'm not going to measure up to the ideal male image pushed on me by our culture. As we work to change the way we view and portray women, we would do well to also reimage manhood so that it allows for a much broader picture, one that accurately reflects the vast majority of real men.


What do you think?

Woman Up!

Among all the idiomatic phrases regularly used in American English, two in particular irritate me beyond measure: “Man up” and phrases or sentences related to “having balls.”


“Man up” – what does this mean anyway? I hear people use it when they want to challenge a man (or even at times a woman) to be decisive, to take action or control of a situation. Perhaps it implies having courage or boldness. But what do any of these have to do with being a man? More specifically, what do they have to do with being a man as opposed to being a woman? Can women not be decisive, take action or demonstrate leadership in a given situation? Do women lack the ability to show courage or boldness? Or do we believe that, by doing so, they are really acting more as men? Are these qualities really more “masculine” or “manly?” And if you affirm them as such, does that somehow make them more desirable or laudable than a quality or characteristic that you would label as “feminine?”


The phrase “to have (or show) balls,” used either as a description of a person or as an admonishment, comes from the same mindset. Men have balls. Men should be strong, courageous, aggressive or assertive, confident. Therefore men who lack these qualities lack balls and need to grow some (yes, that expression gets used too). Women who demonstrate these qualities are displaying masculine characteristics. Whether that is good or bad depends on your view of what women should be like. But she is certainly not being a “lady.” She's acting like a man. At least that is what our use of these expressions implies.


Our very use of language indicates that we view certain qualities as being more male and therefore more desirable. We affirm certain characteristics in men and use them to define manliness. At the same time we either devalue such qualities in women or, if we allow women to display them, we view her as being less feminine and more masculine. But the character traits we have in mind do not depend on gender. They do not define us as men or women, nor should they. Women are fully as capable of showing courage, confidence and leadership as men. Often they do it better, but the fact is that these qualities vary from person to person regardless of gender. 


Unfortunately particular groups and leaders within the Church seem intent on exhorting men to be more masculine, as they define the term. Godly men must “reject passivity” and develop the following characteristics, (borrowed from Karl Wheeler's challenging blog post):

• a strong backbone—a sense of moral conviction
• courage in the face of opposition
• the ability to lead by setting a strong example of moral purity and devotion to Christ
• taking the initiative in matters of faith
• a servant's heart (willing to do some “women's work”)
• a desire to rescue women

But, as Wheeler points out, we see these same qualities in many godly women. The problem is not with the qualities—it is with the idea that these qualities are somehow “masculine” and should define a godly man. They can't define godly women, who are told that their image of godliness is to be passive, meek, submissive, gentle and kind. Never mind that these same qualities can and should be demonstrated by godly men. 


When I read Colossians 3:12 – As God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience – I don't see any indication that these are directed only at women, although these character traits would likely be viewed more as “feminine” than masculine. Despite this, I've never heard anyone admonish someone to “show some ovaries” (to again borrow from Wheeler), although if we affirm the idea of some qualities being more masculine and others more feminine, we should do exactly that if we want to encourage men to be more godly. In fact, I think these “feminine” qualities fit far more closely to the image of godliness that we see in Jesus than any of the ideal “manly” qualities that are more often pushed on men. Maybe we should start exhorting one another to “show some ovaries” or to “woman up.” We could do far worse. 

The Masculine Mystique

On Wednesday I shared some reflections I had on reading Betty Friedan's book The Feminine Mystique. Today I want to explore the corresponding idea of a masculine mystique. Friedan of course was not primarily concerned with this question, but even she hints at it in her book, such as when she writes: “It seemed to me that men weren't really the enemy – they were fellow victims, suffering from an outmoded masculine mystique that made them feel unnecessarily inadequate when there were no bears to kill.” (For those who believe feminism to be fundamentally anti-men, note well her statement here.)


I have not had the time and resources to thoroughly investigate and document this masculine mystique, but I believe it exists as surely as the feminine mystique. The masculine mystique asserts that for a man to be a real man, to belong to the “dude club,” he must demonstrate certain character and behavioral traits. Among these are that he must be strong both physically and emotionally. He must be independent. He glorifies strength and power and the exercise of these in violence – of course only that which is justified by the situation. He enjoys dominating and controlling his environment, including of course being in charge of the women around him. No real man would allow a woman to tell him what to do, though he might lend a moment of his time to listen to her if he must. A manly man should love cars, guns, sports and competition in general. He recognizes that life is a battle and his job is to come out on top.


A card-carrying member of the dude's club could not possibly enjoy literature, romance, the performing arts or expressions of beauty. He can admire a “beautiful” woman or a “beautiful” car, but you won't see him getting emotional over beautiful scenery or a beautiful painting. In fact, the only truly acceptable emotion for a manly man to express openly is anger, because anger demonstrates his desire for power and control. He may tolerate certain “non-manly” things in order to whoo the girl or woman he loves, but he can't possibly admit to liking it or enjoying it. He would lose his club card for such a thing. As I understand it – and I don't know Spanish – the Spanish language has a word for this manliness which we have borrowed into English: macho. A real man is a macho man.


This image of manliness has lost some of its currency in the culture, although our media continues to promote these stereotypes both in programming and advertising. More significantly, the Church continues to uphold the masculine mystique. The Church has added to it certain expectations of being a good, caring, devoted husband, but without losing those core traits of the masculine mystique (which in fact often leaves a man with internal tension as he tries to fulfill both expectations.) Lately certain prominent male Church leaders have made statements pushing for an even stronger masculinization of the church, railing against what they view as the effeminization of Christianity and of men in the Church. Men like Mark Driscoll, John Piper and John Eldredge have written and spoken a clear message upholding traditional, macho-driven models as being the ideal of “biblical” manhood.


The time has come to cast off this masculine mystique. There is room within the Kingdom of God for men of all types. God doesn't welcome only men who meet a certain image of “maleness.” He doesn't check for your dude club card at the entrance. Yes, there's room in the kingdom for men who are very traditionally male. And there's room for men who express characteristics and behavior that have traditionally (and still by many in the Church) been considered “feminine.” I think the designation “masculine” and “feminine” need to lose their meaning in society and in the church. At least they need to lose the stigma we currently attach to them. Men and women are different biologically and they may tend to express certain differences in behavior according to their biology, but much of what we label as masculine and feminine – gender differences – are really culturally and socially determined and therefore can be changed.


Not only does God's kingdom have room for men and women of different characters, but I think that we men need to cast off the masculine mystique because it hinders us from recognizing the qualities of godliness that have too often been labeled as feminine. We need to let go of our desire and need for power and control, for competition and superiority. I could make another entire post out of this topic alone, because I think we have falsely skewed our understanding of faith, godliness and the kingdom of God because of the influence of the masculine mystique.


We do so much damage to individuals and to the body of Christ by insisting that being “godly” means following the feminine mystique if you are a woman or the masculine mystique if you are a man. Godliness isn't about gender. It's about justice, mercy, humility, redemption, transformation and a host of other things that transcend gender.


I have a dream that the Church can become an inclusive, embracing place – a place where men and women are free to develop the character that God has given them without being constrained by culturally-driven definitions of manhood and womanhood. We're not there yet and sometimes I wonder if this dream will ever be realized. But I hold on to the sparks and the small signs of hope and transformation.

In Which My Blood Boils

My wife called my attention to another excellent article recently. While I don't agree with everything this author writes, much of what he said resonated very strongly with this unguy. (Chris, should you ever read this post, you're welcome to join the Unguy Club.)


Like the author, I too am not a member of the Dude's Club. I'm pretty sure I never have been. And while there have been times I wished I could be, I have reached a point of contentment in not being in. In fact I no longer mind being excluded and wouldn't want to join even if I could.


“I'm okay with that, really. Members of the Dude's Club are hard to talk to. When I hang out with them, I feel like I'm constantly being weighed, measured, and found wanting. If I don't drop enough sports references, or if my voice cracks, of if I use too many art terms, or if I express an awe of beauty, or if I talk about how I love to cook, or if I'm not physically aggressive enough, or if I wear the wrong colors, or if I talk poetry... I feel as if I'm relegated to a lesser status. Not a real man. Not a man's man anyway.”


Among the guys I know locally, the favorite activities seem to be hard-core bicycling and hunting. Although I enjoy bicycling, I'm definitely not hard-core about it (I don't have the gear and can't afford it even if I wanted to) and I do not enjoy hunting in the least. Nor am I at all interested in guns. So that effectively limits my involvement and puts me outside the Dude's Club at my church.


More significantly than this question of inclusion or exclusion from the Dude's Club, I like how this author examines the use of the term “effeminate.” Although I disagree with him on the complementarian/egalitarian question, I think he's on target with questioning the way that some Christian leaders (and others) use the word “effeminate” as a label to discount and marginalize men who do not fit their image of manliness. These men are gender shaming all those who don't subscribe to their definition of what a man (or woman) should be. And that's wrong.


“Thus my conclusion is, these 'Esau Christians' are guilty of using gender shaming as a way to insult those they disagree with on minor issues.” [I would argue that not all these issues are minor.] “Call someone effeminate and you can marginalize them. Nitpick about their clothing and you can explain them away as part of the problem. Associate that music style that you dislike so much with womenfolk, and you can get people to reject it. It's emotional manipulation. Faggot, pussy. Girly-man. It's manipulative and it's wrong. Because God, even if he turns out to be complementarian, embraces a wider and larger view of masculinity than Driscoll and Wilson and Rosebrough do. There is room in the church for all kinds of men.”


Like this author, I am not trying to say that men cannot be “manly” in the traditional cultural understanding of this term. If a guy likes guns, or cars, or sports, then great. But if a guy likes art and poetry, beautiful fabrics and pastel colors, that's okay too. We err when we establish some type of behaviour as normal for either gender and then ridicule, mock and marginalize those who don't hold to that. We do this with women as well, pushing them into stereotyped images of what it means to be a godly women that usually have far more to do with our cultural conceptions than they do with anything God has in mind. That was my point in this post. Gender is defined culturally, not divinely.


This use of effiminate as a pejorative label also bothers me deeply because it implies (or states even) that things associated with woman are somehow inferior. It continues the practice of marginalizing activities, behaviours and character-traits that have come to be defined as feminine. The division of these character-traits, behaviours and such into categories of masculine and feminine is culturally and socially driven in the first place and inaccurate in the second. These divisions and labels more often than not define that which is “masculine” as superior and preferable and that which is “feminine” as inferior and to be avoided, particularly by men. Based on these perceptions the worst thing a man could be is like a woman, as if a woman is somehow inferior and exhibits undesirable qualities by virtue of being a woman.


The Body of Christ called the Church should be a place where each individual can embrace and live out her or his identity as a woman or man of God without regard to her or his biological sexual identity. Belittling men because they don't fulfill one's concept of what a “real man” is like has no place in the Church. None. 


“My God is big enough that he describes himself in both Father imagery and Mother imagery. He is bigger than gender, bigger than gender roles, bigger than all the silly trappings. And if in my God there is no Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female – then there certainly isn't any demarcation between the properly manly men in the Dude's club and those of us who aren't macho enough to make the cut.”


And if an unguy like me gets labeled as effeminate, I will accept that as a badge of honor, for it identifies me with our sisters who have been marginalized and demeaned for far too long.

The Color Pink

Today I want to pose a question:


Can Unguys wear pink?


Let me expand on this with one more question:


Can guys in general wear pink?


I say "Yes." Many years ago I had a hot-pink t-shirt that I wore until it was no longer wearable. (Does anyone recall the "Golden Boy" episode on Seinfeld?) Last week I saw a pink t-shirt in the store and decided it was a good time to replace that long-gone, but not forgotten one. You see, I actually rather like the color pink. I'm not saying I want everything to be pink, but I think the color has gotten a bad rap, especially among men. So I'm advocating for a pink revolution.


I was wearing my new pink shirt around the house the other day and both of my children commented that guys aren't supposed to wear pink. "It's just not right," they said. I thought to myself, "Who raised these kids?" They got this idea from the culture, not from me, as they revealed by their further comments. I asked them whether they thought the culture should determine all our choices. They were silent. At other times when the topic of pink has come up and they, especially my son, have made negative remarks, I recite the great line from one of the Pixar shorts:


"Pink, pink, what's wrong with pink? Seems like you've got a pink kink in your think."


So I intend to proudly wear my new pink t-shirt. I expect that my kinds won't be the only ones to raz me about it, but I don't care. I like pink. After all, it's the color of sensitivity, right?


One of these days I'll change my profile picture to me in my new pink shirt.

On "Biblical" Manhood and Womanhood

A lot of ink has been spilled in recent years both figuratively (on-line blogs and articles) and literally (books) on the topic of biblical manhood and womanhood. Some people seem to have this idea that there is a clearly defined concept in the Bible as to what it means to be a man and what it means to be a woman. These people would argue that in order to live godly lives, we need to live in accordance with these prescriptive roles.

I accept that the Bible tells us a lot about what it means to be godly. I reject the notion though that it defines what that looks like for a man as opposed to a woman. This is not to deny differences between men and women. Rather, I assert that these differences are far less significant than the things that we have in common and the attributes that we are called to develop as people of God, men and women.

Rachel Held Evans writes an excellent blog (as do many others, but Rachel is currently my primary window into the other writers out there) in which she often explores questions such as these. In a recent comment on one of her posts, she makes this statement:

My only thought on femininity is that the Bible presents us with such a beautiful range of people - women who were warriors, women who were disciples, women who were mothers, women who were widows, women (like Tamar) who worked the patriarchal systems of their day to survive, women who spoke up, women who defied orders from men, women who were apostles, women who fit right into the social constructs of the time, women who didn't. In other words, I don't believe that the Bible presents us with a single prescriptive mold for how to be women of faith (or how to be men of faith). I believe God wants to use all that makes you uniquely YOU in growing the Kingdom. There is no such thing as *prescriptive* "biblical womanhood."

I wholeheartedly agree with her. I would also state that the Bible doesn't give a single prescriptive image of what it means to be a man of God. I think that much of what some people want to define as biblical manhood or womanhood is really a very cultural perspective. They may fear that accepting men and women for who they are, rather than expecting them to fulfill certain pre-defined roles, threatens in some manner the divine order. I hardly think this is the case. Rather, we violate the image of God within us when we force a person to fulfill a certain role simply because she or he has certain chromosomes. God gifts each of us according to his (or her!) desire and I don't think he looks first to see whether the person receiving the gift is a man or woman.


One concept that seems particularly popular among advocates of a prescriptive “biblical womanhood” is the idea that a biblical woman is first and foremost a mother. But this does not hold true in the biblical stories, nor does it properly value women for who they are as individuals. A person's value should not depend on whether she (or he) has children or not, or whether she or he is married or not. Yet so many of our churches make this a litmus test and in the process devalue a large number of people, particularly those who are single and those who do not have children, whether by choice or for other reasons. There is far more to being a woman or man of God than being a mother or father.

I would like to see us move away from the concept of manhood and womanhood altogether, as if these were some static attributes that we can (and should) put on according to our chromosomes. Instead, we should encourage each of us as individuals, male and female, to develop in the godly attributes of love, compassion, grace and mercy. The true godly qualities do not distinguish between male and female and neither should we.

Whose work?

To what extent, if any, does there exist women's work and men's work? Although I imagine most people understand the question clearly, let me express it differently. Is there work that inherently should be done by women as opposed to work that should be done by men? Or as followers of Jesus Christ are we called to offer a different model, a model of mutual servanthood?

I raise the question because of a recent conversation with a friend of mine. She is a single mom raising a teenage son. She works hard both in and outside the home to provide for herself and her son. But when she asks him to do household tasks, he often responds that these are “women's work” and she should do them. They live in a non-Western culture where gender roles are much more distinct and strong than they are now in the West, so his response is acceptable within the cultural norms, although she has done her best to raise him to a different standard. But his response ignores the fact that his mother by necessity must perform many tasks that would culturally be “men's work” and that she is weary and exhausted, while he spends his time hanging out with his friends. (There are also issues here of respecting one's parents, but that is a different topic.)

When I hear stories like this I become angry. I become angry because of a mindset that continues to perpetuate gender inequality even now in the twenty-first century. I simply do not believe that there are roles, or work, that belong by their very nature to women or men. (I make exception for child-birth, which biologically cannot happen naturally any other way. But even in this the husband can take a more active role than he has traditionally and continues to take in many cultures around the world.) I acknowledge that some work may be more suited to a man or woman due to the nature of the tasks required and the physical characteristics of men and women. But I object to saying that any particular work or role should be done or belongs to men or women. I know many women who are physically stronger than I and therefore more suited to tasks that might be considered “men's work.” At the same time men are also capable of performing work that traditionally has been assigned to women. I don't see any valid basis to argue for an inflexibility delineation of tasks into the categories of men's or women's.

Thankfully in Western cultures we have progressed far in this area (which is not to say that we do not still have room for improvement) But many cultures around the world lag far behind. Unfortunately many people I know who go to work in these cultures do not want to confront this issue because they feel it is a matter of cultural preference. I recognize that it is culturally defined, but I also assert that it can be cultural redefined and offering an alternative example can be a powerful way to begin that process. But we must be willing to risk ridicule and rejection along the way. While living overseas I once was sweeping the sidewalk outside our gate. Our neighbor, another foreigner who had lived longer in that culture, informed me that I was “shaming” my wife by doing work that culturally she was expected to do. Why should it be shameful for a husband to help his wife with the burdens of daily life? And why should I care if others think that way?

I also find it unfortunate that believers often lag behind in this area. Thinking again of people I know who serve cross-culturally, I am disappointed that they do not more actively challenge their local friends and converts in this area. Perhaps it does not seem to them to be a core issue of Christian life. But is that the case? Christ came to transform society, not to simply save souls out of it. What a powerful example we could offer if we as believers modeled not a gender-based division of labor, but rather mutual servanthood. Instead of refusing to do a task because it might bring shame or would be considered the work of the other gender (and most often it seems men have the problem with performing “women's work”), couldn't we offer a powerful model of servanthood by looking for opportunities to serve our brothers or sisters at the point of their need? If a sister (woman) needs help cleaning or cooking, or in any other task, why can we brothers (men) not step up and offer to carry that burden? (Again, women seem to be quicker and more willing to offer this service to men, but the same question could be asked of them.)

The same friend of whom I wrote initially also has a task to help organize a seminar for women. Among other responsibilities she must help with organizational and administrative needs. This comes on top of her many other duties and responsibilities in life. When I heard this, I thought that this would be a great place for the Christian men in the community to step in and offer to help their sisters. Then the women could focus on the direct ministry to women, while the men could offer a powerful example of Christian servanthood by providing for the needs of the women. I expect they would receive a lot of cultural criticism, shame and ridicule for doing so, but at the same time they could offer a powerful testimony of what a life transformed by Jesus Christ looks like.

So let's put aside the outdated concepts of “men's work” and “women's work.” Instead let's adopt an ethic of mutual servanthood and look for opportunities to serve each other as brothers and sisters in Christ. After all, that's the model he gave us.

Little Trials

The rest of my family is currently sick. Teresa came down with it first about a week ago. Then Dietrich and Sharilyn picked it up and they've both been down for several days now as well. That leaves me as the lone healthy person to tend to their needs. I'm not a good nurse. My wife will affirm that. God is working in me, helping me to be more compassionate, patient and kind. In fact I've been meditating lately on Col. 3:12-15. But none of that seems to matter when my family gets sick. I have to work to be thoughtful, patient and caring and easily become irritated and annoyed because their illness is an imposition on my time and energy. This time I'm particularly concerned about falling ill myself since I must leave for a nearly 2-week business trip next week. I don't want to travel while sick, so I'm doing everything I can to avoid catching this, short of leaving them all here to fend for themselves while I go stay at my parents. I mentioned that the other day and my wife didn't find it very funny. Hmmm.

Being a man (or woman) of God often isn't very glamorous. It's a matter of living in Christ amidst the daily demands of life, like taking care of sick family, shopping for groceries, or going to work. It’s easy to be a man of God when everything is going great. But it’s when things aren’t ideal that he is able to form us into his image.

Do-it-Myself?

I am not a do-it-yourself kind of guy. Home improvement is not an unguy thing. It's not that I can't do any repairs or fix-ups around the house. I just don't find much pleasure in doing it. In fact, most of the time I do end up taking care of a lot of household maintenance on my own (or often with the assistance of my dear wife, who is generally more talented in this area than I am.) The reason for this is that, although I don't enjoy DIY, I enjoy even less paying good money to have someone else do it. I'm Scottish by heritage, you know, and it still shows. Frugality is a quality instilled in me quite deeply by my father.

I did "build" a nice wall for a flower bed on our back porch this evening. I say "build" in quotations because all I had to do was put  in position the bricks that my daughter and I had earlier pulled up. Nothing too complex. But it does look nice. That's my kind of project.

Soon I need to tackle the unpleasant job of recoating our roof. I did this once before years ago when we owned our own home. It's not a particularly difficult task. Mostly it's just a lot of work. Here in Arizona many houses, including this one, have flat or lightly sloped roofs, which are not shingled but are coated with some type of elastic coating, which you roll on like paint. Once it dries it makes a weather-resistant, reflective coating, which is great for southern Arizona's sunny weather. Before painting the roof though you have to give a good scrubbing to remove all the dirt. Ours also needs some patching, as the previous owner apparently didn't do any maintenance for years. I don't look forward to this project, but I can handle it. As a bonus my father will be helping me and I may recruit a friend just to make the job go faster.

I envy those who are talented at building things. A friend of mine has been describing in his blog his work at constructing cabinets for his kitchen. I wouldn't even know where to begin. Building tools and I have never had a great relationship. One of the worst grades I ever received in school was in shop class. While they didn't exactly tell me that I was hopeless, the teachers didn't exactly encourage me to pursue my studies any further. As an adult I have stretched myself and learned to do repair jobs I would have avoided in years past. But I recognize that this is neither a gift nor a hobby for me.

At the same time I do have an interest in being creative, so I have had to explore other interests in order to indulge this aspect of my personality. In years past I have enjoyed painting and would like to take it up again someday. I dabble in photography as well and enjoy that. There is something satisfying in working on something and producing a work of art and beauty, whatever it may be.

10 Years Old

Ten years ago today at 12:45AM our son Dietrich joined our family. I find it hard to believe that that baby is now 10 years old! Where do the years go? Dietrich is a wonderful addition to our family and it is impossible to imagine life without him. He is active and energetic, a keen learner with a sharp mind who loves to devour information and share it with you at every possible opportunity.

Being Dietrich's father is a great opportunity for growth. In some ways he is very much like me and in other ways we are quite different. He loves Lego and Star Wars (and the combination of the two) and this weekend we will be hosting a Star Wars birthday party for the young Jedi.

Dietrich is passionate about cars and motor vehicles of any sort. I on the other hand, care very little about them. If I had to repair my own car I could do it, but I would need assistance and would probably not enjoy it at all. Dietrich has yet to try his hand at car repair, but would probably find the whole process fascinating--though he might get frustrated when things didn't go right (which is where he's like me!) Dietrich would probably love to go to a monstor truck rally or a drag race, neither of which appeal to me at all. In this he is more typically male than I am. So the Unguy is having to stretch himself at times. At the same time I try to stretch him as well by engaging him in activities that don't immediately appeal to him. We do enjoy many activities together, like playing soccer, watching sports or racing each other on the GameCube. (This is not always a good thing since it brings out the competitive side in both of us!) Above all I am learning to be patient with him, as our personalities at times clash rather strongly and the sparks can fly.

I thank God that he enriched my life with both a son and a daughter. On this special day though I give particular thanks for the unique person that is Dietrich. He is a joy and a treasure.

Happy Birthday Dietrich!

You're So Vain

I like to ride my bicycle several mornings each week for exercise and relaxation. Most often I ride on a bike path that runs along a dry riverbed not far from our house. Usually I ride on weekday mornings, but recently I’ve been riding Saturday mornings as well. On weekdays the path is mostly empty, with just a few joggers and other bicyclists. On Saturday, by contrast, the path is a very active place with numerous joggers, walkers and bikers.

Last Saturday I stopped at the end point of my ride to rest and drink some water before heading back to the house. As I stood and drank my water I noticed that in the parking lot behind me a large group of cyclists were gathering, all of them dressed identically in professional biking gear. I’m ashamed to admit it, but the minute I saw them I wanted to shrink away and hide because I was ashamed for them to see me in my humble attire. You see, I don’t have any fancy biking gear. I bike wearing ordinary shorts and a t-shirt and my ordinary sports shoes. Nothing fancy. Next to this group of serious bikers in their fancy gear I felt like the poor country cousin who shows up at the banquet, not realizing it was a formal affair. I quickly drank my water, climbed on my bike and pedaled off, hoping that they wouldn’t notice me. As I rode home feeling somewhat sorry for myself, two other bikers blew by me on the road as I huffed my way along. Before long they were far ahead of me. I felt pretty small and vowed to never go out biking on Saturday morning again.

As I have reflected on this incident the past few days, I am ashamed that I felt so self-conscious about what other people might think about my appearance. I know full well that the outward appearance isn’t what really matters. It’s the heart. But at that moment, standing there next to these well-equipped bikers, I really felt small and embarrassed. I cared too much about what they thought of me, when in fact they probably weren’t thinking of me at all. It reminds me of the old song by Carly Simon:

You’re so vain,

You probably think this song is about you.

I’d like to say that this is the only time I’ve struggled with comparing myself to others, but it isn’t. Sometimes I compare myself and I feel pretty good about the results. At other times I compare myself and feel ashamed. But I know that neither the one nor the other is good. I need to grasp with all my heart and mind the truth that the song—that is, this life—isn’t about me at all. It’s about God. The question isn’t whether I look good to others. The question is whether I am striving to live a life that brings honor and glory to God. And the wonderful thing is that when God looks at me, he sees the righteousness of Jesus Christ. So although I am a vain, self-conscious, often weak person who struggles with identity and a host of other issues, God doesn’t see that. Keith Green had a song about this that I really love. Speaking from the perspective of the Father he sang:

When I hear the praises start, I want to rain upon you

Blessings that will fill your heart. I see no stain upon you

Because you are my child and you know me,

To me you’re only holy.

Nothing that you’ve done remains

Only what you do in me.

God himself stated it even better speaking through Paul:

Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he or she is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! (2 Cor. 5:17)

I don’t want to be vain, thinking that this life is about me, always worrying what other people might think of me. But although I am already a new creation, I’m still learning how to live as one. I’m thankful for grace along the journey. Maybe, just maybe, I’ll work up the courage to ride again on Saturday morning and not worry what others might think of my unprofessional attire.

Roles

I found myself on my hands and knees yesterday morning scrubbing the kitchen floor following a small spill of sticky mandarin juice as the kids packed their lunches. This prompted me to think about the whole idea of men’s and women’s roles in society. Some people would say that these roles are quite distinct, while others would say there aren’t really any distinct roles for men and women. Rather it’s all just culturally based. I fall somewhere in the middle. I do think God made men and women different and there are certain things that we each seem to do better in general. But I think we must be careful about prescribing any role for either men or women, because God also makes each one of us unique and our gifts and abilities are not determined by our gender.

Here in the West we have moved a long way toward eliminating the prescription of certain roles as “men’s” or “women’s” and I think that overall this is a good thing. I’m not saying that there is perfect equality, but compared to many other cultures men and women here are far more balanced in their roles. I imagine that most American women are happy to have husbands who actively help with household chores. (Ladies, correct me if I’m wrong.) My wife certainly doesn’t object when I scrub the floor as I did this morning, or when I clean the bathroom or wash the dishes. Are there women out there who would object to this or see it as somehow “unmasculine?” But I’ve lived in other cultures where the men still would never dream of demeaning themselves to do such labor. Interestingly enough, in those cultures I see that most of the time women work far harder, often working outside of the home during the day, then returning home and doing all the housework as well. One day I was sweeping the walk in front of our gate when our neighbor, another American living there, came out and informed me that I was shaming my wife before the neighbors. Apparently only women should sweep around the house and my doing so made both myself and my wife look bad. In other situations I’ve heard of, people must haul water some distant from a well, lake or river. The full pails are heavy, but this too is always women’s work. When the husband of a foreign family living in the community carried water for the family they received a lot of criticism for this.

In such situations I really struggle with my response. I desire to serve my wife and my family by helping around the house. I believe that this is what a godly man does. But what should I do when my desire conflicts with the cultural understanding of what a man should be like? I personally try to discern in each situation what is best, but I hope I err on the side of being a servant rather than being a “real man.” I usually cannot directly challenge the cultural norms. But I believe I can offer a different model for them to consider and, when the situation allows, defend that model as a godly one. I am not claiming that our Western model is inherently better or more godly. But in terms of the balance between roles, I think that the model of a man who is a servant to others is certainly preferable and consistent with God’s teaching.

Pink is the color of sensitivity

I have sensitive teeth. Does that make me a sensitive guy? In and of itself, probably not. It does mean that I have to be careful what I eat. For example, I really like grapefruit, especially fresh off the tree like we can get here in Arizona. But I have learned that my teeth are not so fond of it. If I eat very much, my teeth will hurt from the acid.


One thing I have done for years to help this problem is to use toothpaste for sensitive teeth. What I find interesting is that invariably the toothpaste for sensitive teeth comes in the pink box/tube. This is true regardless of the brand I buy. Why is that? What is it about sensitivity and the color pink? Usually we think of pink as a quintessentially feminine color and we tend to think of women as more sensitive than men, so maybe that's the connection. Does that mean that men can't be sensitive (and I'm not just talking about our teeth!)? I certainly hope not. I think that one thing my wife has in mind when she calls me an unguy is that I am more sensitive than your average male. I like to think that I am, although I admit that my sensitivity is far from perfect. But I'd rather be more sensitive to the feelings of others than be "masculine" and insensitive. If that makes me "pink," so be it. So I will continue to use my pink toothpaste with pride and celebrate my sensitivity.


By the way, I happen to think that it's okay for men to like the color pink, though you won't find me all decked out in it.

What is an unguy?

What exactly is an unguy? (Or should it be un-guy? I haven't decided for myself yet.) Perhaps I should ask my wife to provide a definition, since she was the one who first applied the term to me. I never rejected it, because it always seemed to describe my personality. But rather than offer a nice definition in this first posting, I want to explore the idea (among others) through this blog. By sharing some of my thoughts and experiences I hope to gain a better understanding of what it means to be an unguy, to live as a godly man in a 21st century world. One of my favorite authors is a German pastor, executed at Hitler's orders at the end of WWII, named Dietrich Bonhoeffer. In one of his letters written while he was in prison he pointed out to a friend:

"To be a Christian does not mean to be religious in a particular way, to make something of oneself (a sinner, a penitent, or a saint) on the basis of some method or other, but to be a man--not a type of man, but the man that Christ creates in us."

Rather than accept someone's prescription of what it means to be a man of God, I want to understand what Christ asks of me specifically as a man and as a person. The apostle Paul wrote "I want to know Christ." I echo that statement. But what does this mean practically? Recently I was reading in Matthew and came to the section where Jesus calls people to come to him and take his burden on themselves. What struck me was his description of himself: "I am gentle and humble in heart." Wow. These aren't words that we normally use to affirm a man. But if Jesus used them to speak of himself, then they certainly must be qualities I should desire to see develop in myself. I'm not there yet--in fact I'm a long way from being there. But one aspect of being an unguy for me is to affirm gentleness and humility as godly, masculine qualities.

So I invite you to explore with me. Not every post here will be focused on this theme. I want to share what comes to mind when the muses sway me to write. But a lot of my thinking is in this area these days, so it will certainly be a recurring question.