PSA: My response to "Make a Man Out of You" editorial from Swinging Bridge

Here's the article.

Here's my response:

Zachary,

While I appreciate your willingness to take on a topic that I think needs a lot of serious looking-into -- what it means to be a "man" in today's society -- and while I'm glad you're living up to the standards you've set for yourself in your (and your brothers') relationships, I'm disappointed to see that this article revolves almost exclusively around what men should not be doing with the women they date.

In other words, you've let the issue be determined by exactly those who are pressing us to get what we can (you're referring to sex, in particular, and virtually exclusively) rather than to suggest other things that "make" a man. There aren't even any really concrete suggestions on how men are supposed to "honor" the women they're with.

What I'd like to see, beyond this, is a constructive discussion of what it means to be human, and how humans may define themselves as men (or women). So much of the rhetoric of masculinity has been used, I believe incorrectly, to justify war and national policies based on the use of force or the loss of freedoms (see the Patriot Act) that I think there's a lot of potential material out there for this kind of discussion. What does it really mean to "be a man"? Is it a set of actions? How does being a man relate to having a male body -- are they always correlated? Or are there extra requirements for "manliness"?

I'd also like to see a closer look into how "honor" relates to women, and particularly to their status as virgins or not-virgins. How are these terms used, and how and why are they relevant today? How do they relate to past eras when women could be bought and sold, or rejected on the basis of non-virginity? How do they relate to questions (in the past) of determining paternity in a patrilineal society? In what ways do we need to redefine "honor" for women, to release the concept of "honor" from the historical trappings of property ownership, etc.?

On the other hand, I remember what it was like to be in the Messiah "bubble," where so much revolves around the opposite sex, how to interact with them and what a good result would be for those interactions (i.e. an engagement ring by spring senior year). I can understand how your article speaks more to that audience than to the world at large. I still hope you'll consider looking into the question of what "masculinity" is, and write a new article about being "a man" -- one that problematizes some of the assumptions that pervade both secular and Christian-college society.

(And on a personal note, I'm hoping you don't quote "Wild At Heart" as part of that...but that's just personal.)

I look forward to reading it.