Cane Caldo hilariously describes Pastor Doug Wilson’s new post Masculinity without Permission.*
Even when he tries to avoid blaming men–for one post!–he has to caveat that he would really rather talk about the bad men…but he won’t do it here…even though he thinks he should.
The segment Cane is commenting on is (emphasis mine):
As we confront this disaster—and it is a disaster—the definition of masculinity that I believe we must return to is this: masculinity is the glad assumption of the sacrificial responsibilities that God assigned to men. Now this is the point where, in normal times, if I were not writing in a culture that was not so well-advanced in its pathological condition, I would hasten to add that masculinity was not bluster, bullying, self-seeking aggrandizement, abusive behavior, and so forth. I would qualify against the counterfeits. All that is quite true, but I don’t want to emphasize it right now.
The reason for not yelling up that particular rain spout is that it has been counterproductive. We have been doing that in an unrelenting way for a generation or more, and by doing this we have helped to create and shape the awful conditions that we so lament.
Note that Wilson is nostalgic for the days when feminism was powerful enough that whenever masculinity was discussed the feminist heckler had to be preemptively placated, but not so far down the line that the damage of decades of placating feminists had already produced an undeniable disaster. This is the same kind of nostalgia conservatives have for girls wrestling.
For it is not normal to reflexively bash men as he says he wishes he could do, indeed as he does while claiming he will not. This is an artifact of feminism. And as Wilson explains, as gratifying as it was to reflexively bash men for decades, doing so has lead us to our present disaster:
The sincere Christian men, who falsely believe they are being taught in accordance with the Word, will dutifully disarm. They will abdicate their essential role of actual leadership in the home, and they will call it servant leadership, leading from behind, or “just-what-I-was-going-to-suggest-leadership.” But there is a vast difference between real servant leadership, the kind Christ practiced and enjoined, and the kind that requires men to stand down whenever mama ain’t happy. By so emphasizing servant leadership, the church has not succeeded in establishing more of it, but they have succeeding in giving men a noble-sounding name as a fig leaf for their cowardice.
Note also whose fault it is that we can no longer afford to coddle feminists. It is the good men who listen to Christian leaders. If these men were better, they wouldn’t take what they were being taught seriously. These cowards, these weak men, are screwing feminism up!
*H/T Hmm, The Question.
Edit: Related: If mama ain’t happy
