Jesus, Your Husband, and the Man Cave

Men and women are different.

Society has swung wildly between two extremes on this issue - until the Second World War and the advent of Rosie the Riveter (who also drove tanks, and both tested and delivered high performance airplanes), women were treated with condescension that assumed they weren't far past infantile.

The generation of women who helped win the war didn't return easily to their former roles and subservience, and so began a societal adventure that shows little sign of ending soon.

In the 60s and 70s, a huge number of pop psychology books were inflicted on us, with the explicit message that there was not only complete equality in every respect, bit women didn't need men. (It was never stated that men didn't need women. perhaps the idiocy of such a statement was self-evident, even then.)

Women were supposed to become masculine, and men were supposed to explore their feminine side.

Well, that didn't last long. Guys were intimidated by women who tried to be men, and women were repelled by men who could  'let their inner child cry'.  It's a wonder that the birth rate didn't plummet.

And now, there's an uneasy sort of truce. Women are feminine again, and in ladylike manner they fly attack helicopters and work as astronauts.

Men are masculine, and they...well, they have Man Caves. Places where they can retreat to "be guys", and preserve some of their innate masculine nature.

Or is it all posturing, an excuse for men to act like adolescents with the justification of psychologists?

The idea of celebrating masculinity was boosted through the 90s, with the publications of books like Wild at Heart, Fire in the Belly, and Iron John.

All of these pointed to a visceral 'wildness' that is supposed to be part of the genetic baggage of the male, the qualities that make men hunters and warriors in the right circumstances.

That's the problem - in the right circumstances.

In suburban America there's little calling for warriors, in the literal and physical sense. (The need for moral and spiritual courage is obvious, but it's fundamentally different from a readiness to go out and cleave an enemy's head with an axe. There's a limit to "analogous".)

And yet, that is exactly what the "re-masculinization" movement is reaching for. The drumming in the woods, the chanting, the man-cave...they're all designed to exert a pull toward an ideal of manhood that is really not a part of daily life for the vast majority of men.

It's creating a need that can't be met.

And when there's a need that can't be met, people tend to create circumstances to make up for it, either in action or, more often, in attitude.

And here's where many man today develop a disconnect with their wives and families. They know that Christ calls them to a position of leadership, but the psuedo-spiritual arguments for the "ancient warrior" pull them to a darker part of the soul, from which they try to lead through intimidation of heavy-handed authoritarianism.

What they miss is that Christ calls them to authority and leadership in His likeness.

Not running through the woods banging a skin drum, nor chanting around the campfire.

Christ was a favorite of kids ("let them come to me, and do not hinder them, for such is the Kingdom of Heaven").

He liked and respected women ("Mary has chosen the best part.").

He didn't believe in brandishing weapons as a way of gaining self-respect ("He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.")

Christ didn't have to declare Himself to be a man. He didn't need to do fist-bumps, or arm-wrestle to establish an Apolostolic pecking order. One would assume He didn't need tattoos, either.

He was all man, and simply lived it.