The Damning Effects Of The Masculinity Movement
[What can I say, I'm on a religion kick today.]
I read Wild at Heart in college. Everyone did, or at least, a lot of the guys did. I could spend weeks discussing abstract principles and specific examples of how memes tend to crop up and sweep through Southern evangelical circles like fire. It's the same way fashion and music trends appear seemingly out of nowhere and consume high schoolers or twentysomethings or any given age group, only the church patterns carry more weight because there's an inherent and unspoken perception that the thing you're participating in isn't just new or popular but also Important and Meaningful and Connected to the Fate of Your Immortal Soul. It's why everyone my age from that background still knows the words to "Flood"; sometimes, these things just happen. In college, what happened was John Eldredge's Wild at Heart.
It wasn't just Eldredge's writing style that put me off, or the fact that the book seemed to have been hastily cobbled together and not edited at all. I like to think I have a healthy respect for accuracy and language, and reading about "Jerry McGuire" didn't exactly inspire confidence, since if the author couldn't bother to fact-check his pop culture references, what assurance did I have that he wasn't on theologically shaky ground as well? But my biggest problem with the book was the manner of the responsibility it seemed to be calling me to, and the fact that years of not inconsiderable education and thought, not to mention a set of loving and God-fearing parents, hadn't taught me what Eldredge and others in the burgeoning masculinity movement said was my real purpose. Apparently, while I'd been learning and trying to be a good person, I was supposed to be preparing myself for some kind of epic battle for the heart of a woman and possibly the fate of all mankind.
The Christian camps I attended in the summers of my youth had never skimped on the Braveheart parallels, but while they used Mel Gibson's movie mainly as a terrifying example of sacrifice for a cause, it wasn't until the masculinity movement kicked off that writers and preachers began to see a whole new side of William Wallace for modern Christian men to mimic. Eldredge wrote that most Christian men believe God wants them to be "nice guys," and there's apparently an inherent failure in this that I never really saw. Most of Jesus' teachings and the epistles of the New Testament did seem to be about being, you know, nice.
But Eldredge is just a misguided man of passion next to Marc Driscoll, who through the Mars Hill Church in Seattle is apparently doing his damnedest to ruin my religion. Driscoll has said that the modern church has turned out "a bunch of nice, soft, tender, chickified church boys." And just in case you're wondering if Driscoll is the kind of person who uses words like "dudes" and "chicks" ironically, he isn't: "Sixty percent of Christians are chicks, and the forty percent that are dudes are still sort of chicks." Driscoll's other quotes are equally enlightening: "Jesus was not a long-haired, effeminate-looking dude," but a man with "big biceps." Real men are "dudes: heterosexual, win-a-fight, punch-you-in-the-nose dudes."
There's also a terrifying group called GodMen, all one word. The most worrisome part of this noxious promotional video is the moment at around 2:40 when one of the men in the crowd at the gathering said that he's preparing to be a pastor and as such has thought he needed to be more meek and humble, but he's now had a change of heart. That's right: This man who had been contemplating entering the ministry and pursuing Jesusian qualities that are actually cited in the Beatitudes has decided not to do that because he's been misled by a part of the masculinity movement.
There are two main problems with this whole thing, namely, that the movement creates a false definition for masculinity and then says that it must be pursued. But this is such a dangerous, damning road to walk. It's a divisive tactic born of branding and the desire to sell books, and to mistake the movement's sectarian call for segregation among believers damages the men at its center and would seem to ignore the God they claim to follow. Yet it's also easy to see why the movement has such a foothold in the souls of men my age: It promises power and revolution, and talks about swords and being valiant. We are a generation scattered further afield than our parents; we search for answers and yearn for something like guidance, but this isn't it. This is wrong, and mean, and small-minded, and it plays into an idea of stereotypical maleness that has nothing to do with manhood.
Comments: 11
What makes a man a man?
Am I a man?
Yes.
(Finish it Darek)
You bring up good points. There is definitely a balance in manhood. Manly men are not always sword-swinging vigilantes of justice. And Jesus was the example of how to live the beattitudes and, more importantly, love.
There's a couple things going on with this movement. A not-so-latent homophobia in Christian circles coupled with a desire to backlash against feminists. Hence the sales of these "memes" through the roof.
But, there's some validity to the movement, as well, and it shouldn't necessarily be written off. I'd say there are 2 valid points it makes on a consistent basis.
The first is to call men to responisible leadership of themselves, their families, and their communities. Because men today are more likely to be apathetic at home in regard to spiritual leadership. They are apt to kowtow to others in an attempt to "win them for Christ." They are certainly willing to pass the buck at church. That's not the right way to be a man, either. That Godmen video is certainly scary and a sales pitch to the max. The language of Mr. Driscoll ain't exactly PC. But, everything they say should be taken with a grain of salt. Just like any thing you hear from anybody. It comes across as hyperbole for me. An extreme end of the pendulum's swing. The call to leadership is needed in a big way.
The other valid part of the movement is for men to connect with other men. Society is moving toward cocooning as we wrap ourselves in technology. You would be an exception to that rule. I honestly only know you through your writings (which are great, by the way) and what my bro says of you, but it's obvious to me how important relationship is to you. Most Christian men don't put enough emphasis on that part of the life. Where's the koinonia? How can we demonstrate our love for others if we don't know their needs or pray for them regularly?
Anyway, that's a lot of words. Sorry to do that. You're article is thought-provoking for me, though. Thanks for sharing it.
I love this post. I still think there's a book in you someday.
Daniel:
We were talking in an American religious history class last spring about how the anxiety towards the urban and/or liberal effeminization of good Christian men is a perennial rallying cry in American Christianity. It's part of the cultural legacy of the late nineteenth century, along with Teddy Roosevelt, the YMCA, and Puerto Rico. Delightful.
Anyway, I talked to the professor a bit before class and he had never heard of Wild at Heart, so he called up the home page of Ransomed Heart ministries, and was so taken by it that he put it all up on the big screen and read the book blurbs to the class. When he got to the line in the description of Captivating (the book about women Eldredge co-authored with his wife) that says every woman wants to be rescued, there were audible gasps in the room. In that moment it became crystal clear that all the brilliant unitarians I was sitting with had no idea what half the country actually went through in youth group. The only people wincing in pained recognition were me and the lapsed Baptists.
Anyway, you should read Stephen Prothero's American Jesus, if you haven't already. It's a lot of fun, and it really puts things like...I don't know, our adolescence...in perspective.
Chris
Didn't capitalize "Unitarians." Apologies, New England.
Someone else blogged on this today, a co-worker of mine and a former pastor:
oh geez- painful memories. my high school girlfriend's mom gave Wild at Heart to me to read... i couldn't make it past chapter two. i was then forced to try again in a college small group (fortunately the other guys all saw problems in the book as well. the one that sparked the most author-bashing was eldridge's assertion that Jesus was more like William Wallace than Mother Teresa...).
are there too many other things going on at pajiba for a religion post there? i enjoyed those, and it seems like it has been a while...
Have I told you lately how I'm obsessed with your blog? Its true.
HEAR, HEAR.
that's all i've got for today, but yeah...
and especially about marc driscoll.
About three paragraphs in, I realized you were talking about THAT Wild at Heart, and not the 1990 novel that inspired the David Lynch movie. I actually read the other Wild at Heart in college, but I had forgotten Barry Gifford's name and supposed that it could have easily been "John Eldredge." Me: "People read Wild at Heart in college? There was a life philosophy I was supposed to take away from that book?"
Nice is a hard word. It's not about being nice. I wouldn't say Jesus was nice (he did call people a brood of vipers - not nice), but he was loving. In loving, you're not always nice but you're never an asshole. The "dudes: heterosexual, win-a-fight, punch-you-in-the-nose dudes." sounds like asshole guys we went to school with, and guys that I talk to from time to time.
So, what is manly then, Dan?
May 20, 2008 3:50 PM