It seems popular these days to support the "masculinization" of society and the church, and if one doesn't, and is a female, then one might be assumed a liberal feminist, a misandrist, an unfeminine female, an ostrich, or blind, or ignorant, or something like that. And so I wonder what my reaction should be. Must I jump on the bandwagon in order to maintain integrity in the eyes of others? If I disagree, am I supposed to be "nice" and give a calm, reasoned, "feminine" response?
Well, as this series will hopefully show, I do intend to give a calm, reasoned response to many aspects of this movement. But for the moment, I will let my inner woman, my inner man, my inner sinner, my inner whatever out and confess that I am dismayed by the wrongheadedness of much of this movement. I am angered by its foolishness. I am grieved, on many levels.
I hope to show that the case of the church's "feminization" is a house of cards, a practically hopeless confusion of over-generalization, stereotype, knee-jerk reaction, cultural influence, mis-assessment, incorrect representation of history, incorrect interpretation of Scripture, and misinterpreted statistics. Whew. A strong statement, I know. But a big mistake calls for a strong (and thorough) protest, in my opinion. (Might I be wrong? Of course. But I am convinced enough to offer the time and effort this series will require and make my concerns public -- I am willing to risk wasting resources and going on record as a fool.)
As a preliminary, I will broach some thoughts:
1) We must be careful how we assess the authority of any particular author or speaker who writes or speaks on any given topic. Though a dude (or a dame) writes a book (or a blog post) and a bunch of people, even good people, think all the references look good and the message "sounds right," these do not automatically make it right.
2) We must be careful how we decide what and whom we trust, and beware trusting anything or anyone fully.
3) People seem quick to jump on bandwagons.
4) It seems that people (including me) don't always truly appreciate the difficulties inherent in understanding movements, or history. Some perhaps do not realize, or care to take, the time and attention necessary to fully grasp a phenomenon. Perhaps some are brainwashed by the typical black-and-white, linear-statement "fact-list"-type history instruction they got in school or college, and the same type presentation of "facts" we commonly read in the newspaper. They fail to look for "the rest of the story" or accept that, more often than not, all the necessary facts are simply not available.
5) Just as a rumor spreads false information far and wide, so can the perpetuation of information not properly checked out falsely inform us. After enough seemingly reputable sources repeat it (and enough people want to believe it), it seems to become accepted as fact. (May I never do this!)
Coming up, I'll talk about fact-checking, and scholarship, and Socrates. Really.
