-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I am of the firm belief that there is nothing new under the sun. The outward display of our sin may change through the generations, but the root sin IS THE SAME. Humans struggle with selfishness, greed, control, power, pride and idolatry the SAME WAY they struggled with all of those things a hundred years ago, and a thousand years ago. Only the methods used to gain those ends have changed through the years.
So, you can (and do) often lament about how much better women were 50-100 years ago (or in other cultures), but I believe perhaps their faults and problems back then (or in other cultures) were probably just flying under your particular radar Biscuit, while the faults of women today obviously target your "hot button" issues.
That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one might say, "See this, it is new "? Already it has existed for ages Which were before us.… (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10)
So, you can (and do) often lament about how much better women were 50-100 years ago (or in other cultures), but I believe perhaps their faults and problems back then (or in other cultures) were probably just flying under your particular radar Biscuit, while the faults of women today obviously target your "hot button" issues.
That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one might say, "See this, it is new "? Already it has existed for ages Which were before us.… (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10)
It doesn't seem out of line to take the concept and broaden it a bit. Instead of the real man, we'll call our realistic model the "moral culture." Since people of all times and all places sin, the moral culture is defined by if they recognize sin and what they do to mitigate that sin.
That people will fall is a given and it is the most important constant to understand after God's sovereignty alone. Some cultures either develop or maintain mechanisms that deal with the ever-present sin issue. Sure, a man could have been a philanderer in the 1700's. In fact, there were times when the out-of-wedlock birth rates were proportionately greater than some of the modern stats (see the American Republic in the early 1800's, woohoo! what a time).
What made those times different though is that there was a common system of values to re-enforce the moral baseline if you will. The trouble is that Western culture has been in the process of surgically removing these institutions, making times, indeed, worse than they ever have been for us (note: not for other civilizations, as a quick reading of ancient sexual practices will make our current situation look downright puritanical).
In sum, I think most of us forum conservatives are not making the argument for some nostalgia drugged utopia. We want to reattach the limbs others have cut off to keep the body in good working order.
You bring up another interesting component to our modern predicament: popular culture. Pop culture tells us mainly the values of the era in which the pop culture was made not so much the era they were talking about.
Yes, men were sinful in the era Mad Men depicts. But that is also what a group of more modern writers want you to see. Not to mention what they think you want to see going by broad cultural trends, focus groups, and an array of other statistical tools (scientific and unscientific).
The Marx Brothers were not boy scouts, but they wouldn't have survived long at all in the 30's if they had made movies that encouraged real boy scouts to act like them.
Yes, men were sinful in the era Mad Men depicts. But that is also what a group of more modern writers want you to see. Not to mention what they think you want to see going by broad cultural trends, focus groups, and an array of other statistical tools (scientific and unscientific).
The Marx Brothers were not boy scouts, but they wouldn't have survived long at all in the 30's if they had made movies that encouraged real boy scouts to act like them.
A
It's nice to see you Desdichado back in good form. The socio-economic problems are already moderate and moving toward severe and unless they are resolved will reach critical at some point this century.
Consider: The Male Identity Crisis and the Decline of Fatherhood | Psychology Today
Here's an excerpt:
"'The scale of marital breakdowns in the West since 1960 has no historical precedent that I know of,' says Lawrence Tone, a noted Princeton University family historian, 'There has been nothing like it for the last 2,000 years, and probably longer.' Consider what has happened to children. Most estimates are that only about 50% of the children born during the 1970-84 'baby bust' period will still live with their natural parents by age 17-a staggering drop from nearly 80%...
A committee assembled by the Board of Children and Families of the National Research Council, concluded "children learn critical lessons about how to recognize and deal with highly charged emotions in the content of playing with their fathers. Fathers, in effect, give children practice in regulating their own emotions and recognizing others' emotional clues."
At play and in other realms, fathers tend to stress competition, challenge, initiative, risk taking and independence. Mothers, as caretakers, stress emotional security and personal safety. Father's involvement seems to be linked to improved quantitative and verbal skills, improved problem-solving ability and higher academic achievement for children. Men also have a vital role to play in promoting cooperation and other "soft" virtues. Involved fathers, it turns out according to one 26 year longitudinal research study may be of special importance for the development of empathy in children.
Family life-marriage and child rearing-is a civilizing force for men. It encourages them to develop prudence, cooperativeness, honesty, trust, self-sacrifice and other habits that can lead to success as an economic provider by setting a good example."
Consider: The Decline of Fatherhood — Features — Utne Reader
Here's an excerpt:
"Not so long ago, social scientists and others dismissed the change in the cause of fatherlessness as irrelevant. Children, it was said, are merely losing their parents in a different way than they used to. You don’t hear that very much anymore. A surprising finding of recent research is that it is decidedly worse for a child to lose a father in the modern, voluntary way than through death. The children of divorced and never-married mothers are less successful in life by almost every measure than the children of widowed mothers. The replacement of death by divorce as the prime cause of fatherlessness is a monumental setback in the history of childhood."
In addition to the legislative and judicial system replacement of the traditional family model with the feminist child support model (and it's undesirable, uber-expensive, and ultimately unsustainable socio-economic costs), the decline of orthodox Christianity in Western Civilization, the transformation of the job market away from one that benefits males, etc... there has also been a subtle but sweeping feminist culture war against males. Have you seen the male suicide rate lately? It's risen sharply. The suicide rate for middle-aged men was 27.3 deaths per 100,000, while for women it was 8.1 deaths per 100,000. One interesting fact is that for divorced men it's twice as high as for those that never married.
Man up men! You're just immature and not mentored correctly and really not much of a man at all if you don't take the terrible deal we're currently offering! <-- Yeah right [sarcasm intended].
Consider: The Male Identity Crisis and the Decline of Fatherhood | Psychology Today
Here's an excerpt:
"'The scale of marital breakdowns in the West since 1960 has no historical precedent that I know of,' says Lawrence Tone, a noted Princeton University family historian, 'There has been nothing like it for the last 2,000 years, and probably longer.' Consider what has happened to children. Most estimates are that only about 50% of the children born during the 1970-84 'baby bust' period will still live with their natural parents by age 17-a staggering drop from nearly 80%...
A committee assembled by the Board of Children and Families of the National Research Council, concluded "children learn critical lessons about how to recognize and deal with highly charged emotions in the content of playing with their fathers. Fathers, in effect, give children practice in regulating their own emotions and recognizing others' emotional clues."
At play and in other realms, fathers tend to stress competition, challenge, initiative, risk taking and independence. Mothers, as caretakers, stress emotional security and personal safety. Father's involvement seems to be linked to improved quantitative and verbal skills, improved problem-solving ability and higher academic achievement for children. Men also have a vital role to play in promoting cooperation and other "soft" virtues. Involved fathers, it turns out according to one 26 year longitudinal research study may be of special importance for the development of empathy in children.
Family life-marriage and child rearing-is a civilizing force for men. It encourages them to develop prudence, cooperativeness, honesty, trust, self-sacrifice and other habits that can lead to success as an economic provider by setting a good example."
Consider: The Decline of Fatherhood — Features — Utne Reader
Here's an excerpt:
"Not so long ago, social scientists and others dismissed the change in the cause of fatherlessness as irrelevant. Children, it was said, are merely losing their parents in a different way than they used to. You don’t hear that very much anymore. A surprising finding of recent research is that it is decidedly worse for a child to lose a father in the modern, voluntary way than through death. The children of divorced and never-married mothers are less successful in life by almost every measure than the children of widowed mothers. The replacement of death by divorce as the prime cause of fatherlessness is a monumental setback in the history of childhood."
In addition to the legislative and judicial system replacement of the traditional family model with the feminist child support model (and it's undesirable, uber-expensive, and ultimately unsustainable socio-economic costs), the decline of orthodox Christianity in Western Civilization, the transformation of the job market away from one that benefits males, etc... there has also been a subtle but sweeping feminist culture war against males. Have you seen the male suicide rate lately? It's risen sharply. The suicide rate for middle-aged men was 27.3 deaths per 100,000, while for women it was 8.1 deaths per 100,000. One interesting fact is that for divorced men it's twice as high as for those that never married.
Man up men! You're just immature and not mentored correctly and really not much of a man at all if you don't take the terrible deal we're currently offering! <-- Yeah right [sarcasm intended].
B
I am of the firm belief that there is nothing new under the sun. The outward display of our sin may change through the generations, but the root sin IS THE SAME. Humans struggle with selfishness, greed, control, power, pride and idolatry the SAME WAY they struggled with all of those things a hundred years ago, and a thousand years ago. Only the methods used to gain those ends have changed through the years.
So, you can (and do) often lament about how much better women were 50-100 years ago (or in other cultures), but I believe perhaps their faults and problems back then (or in other cultures) were probably just flying under your particular radar Biscuit, while the faults of women today obviously target your "hot button" issues.
That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one might say, "See this, it is new "? Already it has existed for ages Which were before us.… (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10)
So, you can (and do) often lament about how much better women were 50-100 years ago (or in other cultures), but I believe perhaps their faults and problems back then (or in other cultures) were probably just flying under your particular radar Biscuit, while the faults of women today obviously target your "hot button" issues.
That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one might say, "See this, it is new "? Already it has existed for ages Which were before us.… (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10)
11 aunts; 10 married; no divorces: average length of marriage: 50 years till death. My youngest sister who just turned 60 celebrate their 40th year anniversary.
I guess I can say that I have always been surrounded by "real women."
A
Part 1: The Sexodus, Part 1: The Men Giving Up On Women And Checking Out Of Society
Part 2: The Sexodus, Part 2: Dishonest Feminist Panics Leave Male Sexuality In Crisis
Part 2: The Sexodus, Part 2: Dishonest Feminist Panics Leave Male Sexuality In Crisis
Hmmmm!!! Let's examine my family tree on both sides a little bit:
11 aunts; 10 married; no divorces: average length of marriage: 50 years till death. My youngest sister who just turned 60 celebrate their 40th year anniversary.
I guess I can say that I have always been surrounded by "real women."
11 aunts; 10 married; no divorces: average length of marriage: 50 years till death. My youngest sister who just turned 60 celebrate their 40th year anniversary.
I guess I can say that I have always been surrounded by "real women."
A
The author is definitely not a Christian and writing solely from a worldly perspective; however, there are important things to glean from his diatribe nonetheless.
One of them is that, though long in coming, a strong hardcore pro-male social revolution has now formed and is rapidly accelerating numerically populated by both the young (always pay attention when the youth become involved) and the middle-aged. I wish it were solely a Christian social movement with a clear outline of reform back to a godly traditional family model but it is instead primarily a secular social movement that is somewhat influenced by the participation of Christian conservatives.
This movement's core is composed of deeply committed males (many who have suffered) and their female conservative counterparts and is positioning itself to mount a no holds barred fight against liberal feminists and feminism that will be exactly as intense as the fight liberal and radical feminists themselves mounted in the 60s thru the 90s. Make no mistake, moving into this century the sparks are going to fly between these two groups.
Complicating the situation for the feminists will be a consistent socio-economic decline which will favor the pro-male side as government money to fund the child support (e.g. welfare) model they created on the back of the traditional family model decreases over time due to mounting federal and state debt problems and the accelerating interest payments due on that debt each year which will eventually come to dominate the federal and state budgets (and sooner rather than later if compound interest rates increase).
Now Christian communities are somewhat insulated from all of this because of our worldview which clearly lays out what a family is and what the roles are and the behavior should be in the Bible; however, as this new male-driven reactionary gender war gains steam over the next couple of decades Christians are going to be affected and perhaps in a good way if men successfully recover what they lost and begin to look at marriage again as positive institution for their personal lives.
That would be good as presently a material share of males, Christians included, have simply opted out of the child support deputy marriage model that was created by feminists to replace the traditional family model. They do not like it, see marriage devalued as an institution because of it, and analytically understand it's not friendly to them and their futures. It took a long time, but men (and especially young men) are now increasingly altering their behavior to live apart from it. They want nothing to do with it anymore.
It's no secret to those of us who look at the statistics and studies why men are increasingly opting out of traditional courtship and marriage. And like the lady who started this thread stated, a LOT of very nice women are being hurt as they sit in the pews waiting for God to bring them their man. The problem is there's a devil in the way and the devil's name is liberal/radical feminism.
One of them is that, though long in coming, a strong hardcore pro-male social revolution has now formed and is rapidly accelerating numerically populated by both the young (always pay attention when the youth become involved) and the middle-aged. I wish it were solely a Christian social movement with a clear outline of reform back to a godly traditional family model but it is instead primarily a secular social movement that is somewhat influenced by the participation of Christian conservatives.
This movement's core is composed of deeply committed males (many who have suffered) and their female conservative counterparts and is positioning itself to mount a no holds barred fight against liberal feminists and feminism that will be exactly as intense as the fight liberal and radical feminists themselves mounted in the 60s thru the 90s. Make no mistake, moving into this century the sparks are going to fly between these two groups.
Complicating the situation for the feminists will be a consistent socio-economic decline which will favor the pro-male side as government money to fund the child support (e.g. welfare) model they created on the back of the traditional family model decreases over time due to mounting federal and state debt problems and the accelerating interest payments due on that debt each year which will eventually come to dominate the federal and state budgets (and sooner rather than later if compound interest rates increase).
Now Christian communities are somewhat insulated from all of this because of our worldview which clearly lays out what a family is and what the roles are and the behavior should be in the Bible; however, as this new male-driven reactionary gender war gains steam over the next couple of decades Christians are going to be affected and perhaps in a good way if men successfully recover what they lost and begin to look at marriage again as positive institution for their personal lives.
That would be good as presently a material share of males, Christians included, have simply opted out of the child support deputy marriage model that was created by feminists to replace the traditional family model. They do not like it, see marriage devalued as an institution because of it, and analytically understand it's not friendly to them and their futures. It took a long time, but men (and especially young men) are now increasingly altering their behavior to live apart from it. They want nothing to do with it anymore.
It's no secret to those of us who look at the statistics and studies why men are increasingly opting out of traditional courtship and marriage. And like the lady who started this thread stated, a LOT of very nice women are being hurt as they sit in the pews waiting for God to bring them their man. The problem is there's a devil in the way and the devil's name is liberal/radical feminism.
Last edited:
Hmmmm!!! Let's examine my family tree on both sides a little bit:
11 aunts; 10 married; no divorces: average length of marriage: 50 years till death. My youngest sister who just turned 60 celebrate their 40th year anniversary.
I guess I can say that I have always been surrounded by "real women."
11 aunts; 10 married; no divorces: average length of marriage: 50 years till death. My youngest sister who just turned 60 celebrate their 40th year anniversary.
I guess I can say that I have always been surrounded by "real women."
My main concern with the "manosphere" as that they identify important aspects of the problem, but the Christian answer to the stated problem is ignored by them or even chided as an effeminate alternative.
A culture that tears down feminism only to replace it with a Romanesque system that counts women as property is no culture I will take part in.
Until we realize that the fundamental problem is sin, we will be adrift.
A culture that tears down feminism only to replace it with a Romanesque system that counts women as property is no culture I will take part in.
Until we realize that the fundamental problem is sin, we will be adrift.
Im part of the young male checked-out-of-marriage demographic and I'll be part of the male take-back-our-freedoms demoraphic to. BUt I won't be rallying for traditional marriage, I'll be rallying for legal rights of parenthood, legal rights of alimony, legal rights of power and legal rights in every other department radical feminists are a little bit too wimpy to pursue. And when as many men as women get alimony payments, and when as many men as women are the sole custodial guardians of their kids, and when as many women as men are destitute, fed up and under-represented, broke, misered and lonely, then we can all sit back and think about the way forward, back into monogamous and faithful relationships, with the added benefit of a renewed perspective and genuine equal legal rights.
There's no going back to patriarchal marriage, not now, not after the taste of 'liberation' (if you can call it that), has been put on the lips of a generation of women. The only way forward is to ride the tide and rock the boat the whole way to the side the radical feminists would have it; real equality, the kind where a man hits a woman back in self-defense and gets off scot free, the kind where a man takes the kids, the car and the house in court, the kind where a man sits pretty while his wife (who earns more than him) struggles and works to excess.
The kind where we begin to value respect between sexes, not off the back of fear, but off the back of mutual experience wearing shoes on the other foot. That's the only cure; feed 'em equality 'til it makes 'em sick.
There's no going back to patriarchal marriage, not now, not after the taste of 'liberation' (if you can call it that), has been put on the lips of a generation of women. The only way forward is to ride the tide and rock the boat the whole way to the side the radical feminists would have it; real equality, the kind where a man hits a woman back in self-defense and gets off scot free, the kind where a man takes the kids, the car and the house in court, the kind where a man sits pretty while his wife (who earns more than him) struggles and works to excess.
The kind where we begin to value respect between sexes, not off the back of fear, but off the back of mutual experience wearing shoes on the other foot. That's the only cure; feed 'em equality 'til it makes 'em sick.
A
Indeed. There is no doubt undesirable non-Christian groups are involved. I despise the whole PUA involvement, for example. And those whom are atheists are not friendly to the Christian worldview. But the movement is going forward nonetheless and before it's over societies and related bodies of law will be materially altered to whatever degree they ultimately are.
A Romanesque system is not a credible threat; however. Such a culture would not manifest unless society itself completely collapsed and barbarianism returned with the strong taking as slaves the weak. I mean did you really think about that before you said it? LOL! That's not going to happen.
A Romanesque system is not a credible threat; however. Such a culture would not manifest unless society itself completely collapsed and barbarianism returned with the strong taking as slaves the weak. I mean did you really think about that before you said it? LOL! That's not going to happen.
A
Those who think like you presently represent the largest percentage of the movement and are leading it. That said, there is a strong conservative Christian minority attempting to influence it and the current leaders of the movement are listening to them and their blogs and publications clearly reveal this. And, of course, God may show up as He does periodically in human history and alter it. This is easy to observe as sweeping spiritual revivals always accompany His involvement and change the political and social landscape. So, we shall just see what transpires.