Enough About Men…What Do You Think About Men?
Essays, Featured — By Jordan Green on July 28, 2010 at 8:00 am
I’m guessing you knew this already, but Mark Driscoll, the flamboyant head of Mars Hill in Seattle, is a mildly controversial character. He hates The Shack and Avatar. He went from emergent poster boy to neo-Calvinist poster boy. He was the subject of a pretty good, and somewhat scathing, New York Times piece. He made John MacArthur mad. He got in some sort of pissing match with Doug Pagitt, then apologized, and it was a big deal at the time. Oh, and there was the time Mark linked the sexual failings of pastors to the fact their wives often let themselves go. Eh, I could go on and on and on. I’ve known many people who attended Mars Hill or worked closely with Driscoll, and each regards him as a brilliant theologian, and each would admit Mark has issues. I’m of the mindset Mark Driscoll is, overall, good for American Christianity. He may struggle with power and leadership, but he has courage and convictions, he wants to lead people to Jesus, and he’s done a lot of good for a lot of believers. I have this sneaking suspicion the Apostle Paul was the same sort of guy as Mark. I mean, Paul was a better church builder, obviously, but I think he had a similar personality.
And yet, Mark Driscoll is just so fun to laugh at. For some reason, it seems okay, too. Mark makes fun of people, so can’t we make fun of him?
To the world outside Mars Hill, Mark’s most hilarious foible is his incessant reminders that he is a man. I’ve had a number of strong male role models in my 30 years, and I’d say one of the overarching traits I’ve noticed in all these guys was they didn’t need to keep reminding you they had penises. It was an unspoken assumption, and, frankly, something I didn’t think much about.
In recent years, Christians like me have been trained to distrust that sort of overcompensation. If we’ve learned anything from leaders caught up in scandal, it’s that, odds are, they’ll be exposed as participating in the very behavior they obsessively condemn from the pulpit. It’s the whole Shakespearean, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks” corollary. And Mark Driscoll goes overboard explaining he’s a dude.
One example is MMA. (That’s Mixed Martial Arts in case you’re a woman or weak man.) I won’t deny fighting is fun to watch, and I’m certainly not immune to the aesthetics of, say, Kimbo Slice destroying a much larger guy in a backyard. Mark, on the other hand, really likes fighting. Seriously. Here he is talking about it!
I love that first line:
“I don’t think there’s anything purer than two guys in a cage…uh…no balls, no sticks, no bats, no help, no team…and just see which man is better.”
See, you might read that as subconscious innuendo, but in fairness, some clarification was needed because there are so many games played in a cage with balls and sticks that are not bats. You might also assume Jesus’ ministry focused a lot on one-on-one competition, since this is a Biblically-based pastor extolling the virtues of determining “which man is better”. In Mark’s defense, though, I am criticizing, and I am definitely lazy.
While the world of Mixed Martial Arts might seem solely the realm of masculine, manly men rolling around half-naked in what only seems like a modified S&M dungeon, but you might be surprised to learn the link between homoeroticism and fighting is well-documented. Essentially, obsession with MMA fighters is the 21st century equivalent of pointing to your love of the volleyball scene in Top Gun as evidence of your masculinity.
One of Mars Hill's buildings. The church has swelled to over eleventy-thousand congregants, but numbers don't matter.
The shame is, all this compulsion toward establishing manhood undermines Mark Driscoll’s status as a brilliant teacher. So when he puts out a good, thoughtful book like Religion Saves (which features an excellent, if slightly tainted perspective on the emergent church and a surprisingly sharp take on birth control), his public perception keeps people from reading.
I think Mark is aware, at least on some level, of his reputation outside his church. He likes conflict, after all, so I get the impression he’s familiar with his Google search results.
So, going completely against his stereotype as a chauvinist who overcompensates for his insecurities by frequently bringing up his own masculinity, the Mars Hill blog has embarked on a series devoted to exploring Biblical manhood. The subject matter is laudable. Being a Christian man is fraught with unique difficulties, struggles and temptations, and too often men’s ministries slip into one-note discussions on pornography and masturbation, when those should be more accurately viewed as symptoms of greater issues in our relationship with God. The first question on my mind, though, was, “is Biblical manhood ever not the subject of Mark’s teachings?”
The series, so far, has addressed some good themes, like the line men need to toe between being Cowards and being Chauvinists. I suppose this is true, though, again, I’ve met many men who appear to have found an equilibrium between the two, and have maintained that for years on end. I’ve erred on both sides of that line many times, but I wouldn’t regard it as one of my essential faith struggles. I was fortunate enough, however, to be raised by a good, strong and present father in an intact family, and I realize many men weren’t provided that opportunity.
Next, Mark addressed each of the three types of Cowards and Chauvinists, all of which are valid archetypes. What’s interesting is three of the Chauvinists (No Sissy Stuff Sam, Success and Status Stewart and I’m the Boss Bob), directly discuss the criticisms Mark Driscoll faces most: that he overcompensates when it comes to masculinity, that he constantly refers to Mars Hill in terms of congregant numbers, and that he kicks out church leadership who question or rebuke him. Of course, Mark doesn’t confess to struggling with any of the types at all.
Then there was yesterday’s post.
“But enough about me and men and masculinity,” Mark seemed to say. “What do women think about me and men and masculinity?”
So he polled some ladies. Five of them to be exact. Oh, and they all attend Mars Hill willingly. Well, all except Trinity, age 6, who is likely captive to the will of her parents. You’ll be shocked to learn these women were very adulatory toward Mark and the men at Mars Hill. For example, there’s Melissa, who is 21 and “dating/courting”. (Isn’t it either one or the other?)
What do you think of MH men?
Well I’m dating one, so I like them a lot! … I think [Pastor Mark] prepares them for courting and not dating. He teaches them how to be the man in a relationship and how to respect a woman, and I’ve never experienced that before this. I think most Mars Hill guys are like that.
This gave me a great idea. In the comments, if you are a female reader, please feel free to say great things about me, and how, as an editor of Burnside, I have made your life better. Later, I will publish the most praise-worthy comments in a Burnside article. Maybe we’ll hand out a prize or something.
My favorite responder, though, was Natalie.
What have you noticed that’s particular about Mars Hill men?
I’ve never hung out with a group of guys who had the intention of just getting to know you. It’s so refreshing. I can be myself. Some of the guys, when you go to a party, all their focus is on is drinking. They don’t even talk to you or care unless you’re gonna end up with them later. … You’re objectified by other guys, and then you come to church and you’re actually a person, you’re a friend, or you’re someone interesting. It’s not just to date and have some fling. It’s great and so refreshing.
Natalie is 21 and single. Here is a picture of Natalie from the blog post. Now, I’ve been a churchgoing male all my life, and most of the time, I was single. I’ve also known many, many single churchgoing men. I consider them to be some of my best friends. All things considered, there are two things I can guarantee:
1) None of those churchgoing men are talking to Natalie “just to get to know” her. Every single one absolutely cares if Natalie is going to end up with him later (if not in the immediate future, then long-term). Every single one is hoping to date (or court, or whatever), or at least have a fling. And if I’m honest, I’d guess most are perfectly fine kicking things off with the fling and seeing where it goes from there. All of what I have said is irrefutable fact, with the following caveat:
2) If they are talking to Natalie and not interested in dating/courting/flinging with her, they are most likely not attracted to women.
I hope that’s not coming off chauvinist. There’s nothing wrong with men wanting to date, and it doesn’t make them objectifying slimeballs for showing interest in attractive single women. Men have been known to carry on platonic friendships with women, but it’s not common, and it’s even more rare when the woman looks like Natalie. If Natalie has a bunch of heterosexual guy friends who keep telling her they just want to be friends, they are lying, and they don’t have the plums to ask her out.
The bottom of the post promises a second installment of what Mars Hill women think of Mars Hill men, and it’s quite possible that entry will be rife with admonishment and Biblically-based criticism. I have my doubts.
Until then, I’ve decided to utilize Mars Hill’s rigorously introspective examination of it’s male population on another religious order frequently accused of subjugating women.
LeeAnne, 23
Betrothed/Reassignment, Colorado City
What do you think of FLDS men?
Well I’m dating one, so I like them a lot! … I think [Prophet Jeffs] prepares them for courting and not dating. He teaches them how to be the man in a relationship and how to respect a woman, and I’ve never experienced that before this. I think most Fundamentalist Latter-Day Saint guys are like that.
So what does your future husband value you for now?
I’ve got a strong back and wide birthing hips, and he treasures me for that.
What’s something your current betrothed does that the husband you were previously assigned to didn’t do?
Well, I suppose the simplest answer is he doesn’t question the Prophet.
Finally, is polygamy wrong?
No.
There you have it. Proof.
—
[UPDATE] Burnside contributor Russ Masterson pointed me to this Daily Show clip, which also discusses the ties between Christianity and ultimate fighting.
48 Comments
I like Driscoll. Like many of the authors or teachers I like, including Miller, MacArthur, Eldredge, Piper, Ryle, Billy Graham, or my own pastor, he’s not perfect. I take the good stuff, and apply it to my life, and don’t consider the bad stuff to be a showstopper.
When I used to listen to his sermons regularly, the context made his fixations on manliness become more understandable. As with anything, context is huge. In his case, it appears that Seattle is different from many cities in a lot of ways, and it appears that his church is full of young men who are more interested in using women than truly loving them. His sermons, therefore, while available for the world to hear, are pointed to a specific group of people who apparently need to hear them.
Very true on the context of who he’s speaking to, but I would contend that if the men in his congregation are prone to using women (and I would say that’s not my impression of Seattle any more than it is any other city), then his hyper-masculine approach seems like it would reinforce those views.
Good post, Jordan. I’m on an informal vitriol fast, so I’ll reserve negative comments. James, I agree there’s a little good in everything/body, and conversely, at least a little bad. But I take exception to your “take what’s beneficial; leave what sucks” approach. When people are in a context, lines get really blurry. When there’s a charismatic personality, the bad seems a lot not-so-bad. So on one hand, there need to be loving, formative relationships in Jesus’ body. On the other, the internet makes those really hard. On the one hand, how many loving, formative relationships does Driscoll have? On the other, we are not forming him; neither do we have the benefit/damage of knowing or learning from him.
As an aspiring smart guy, I try to take the good and leave the bad. But as a body, is there a way to holistically care for all where we lovingly form increasingly good lives?
John, I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying.
Jordan, I’m not over-defending Driscoll. A lot of what he says makes me roll my eyes. But I do think a lot of what he is saying is good stuff, and is scripturally sound. Just like the others I mentioned above. And just like them, some of his stuff is off-base. But my point is that lots of things which aren’t so bad sound much worse when taken out of context, that’s all.
As a female in Seattle, I don’t know that it’s all that much different in terms of how men relate to women than any other big city. In fact, many of the men here are much more likely to be egalatarian than your average city, in part because it’s a heavily liberal area. So, while you may be right that his sermons are aimed at a Seattle-specific audience, I’d like to take a minute to say that Seattle guys are pretty awesome, and most of the ones I’ve met aren’t into using women either (and that goes for Seattle guys that aren’t Christians, too).
Granted, I’m married and hugely pregnant right now, so maybe my impression of Seattle guys is a bit skewed, but I really don’t think that the argument that Mark Driscoll has to tone his messages this way because Seattle guys are such douchebags is fair at all. And I won’t even touch on the point that most Seattle guys aren’t actually from Seattle originally, either. But really, they don’t deserve to be lumped in as somehow needing to hear Mark Driscoll’s messages on how to not use women any more than the rest of the men in the U.S. Seattle guys are alright, really.
Thanks, Jordan. You’re right that he is fun to laugh at. Of course, I may be biased because Driscoll has completely misinterpreted Paul to denounce my chosen job of stay-at-home father. Rather than categorically denounce the guy, I just try not to pay too much attention to him. (So thanks for blowing that.)
Nice Jordan! I thoroughly enjoyed the article. I always enjoy beating people with their own stick
I am worried about the implication in the statement:
“While the world of Mixed Martial Arts might seem solely the realm of masculine… you might be surprised to learn the link between homoeroticism and fighting is well-documented.”
Is the implication that homosexual men are inherently not masculine or could not exhibit what we are socialized to think of as masculine qualities? That being with other men automatically strips men of their perceived masculinity?
It’s not what Driscoll would consider masculine, in any case.
This is a good point, Rachel, and thanks for bringing it to my attention. That implication is perfectly understandable.
To get myself off the hook, I’d say two things:
1) “dd” is right.
2) Unequivocally, the most courageous man (and one of the most masculine men) I knew from my generation was gay. I don’t mean “was” gay and now he’s not. I mean he’s not around anymore.
Maybe that’s like saying, “some of my best friends are black!”, and it’s possible that comment came out of some subconscious stereotyping, but that’s not actually what I believe.
Two words: Gina Carano.
Female MMA fighter.
No man with a working eye could call her masculine, but I guarantee that she could make Driscoll tap out in the octagon.
Ah yes, hiding behind Christianity to come across as caring, thoughtful, and someone who sees women “just as a person” is a ploy I’m all too familiar with. The hours I spent asking girls about where they were with God was so totally worth it IF I got to touch boobies later on.
Oh, I’m sure there is a balance there, and I’m sure my church culture actually did help me respect women in some ways more than I otherwise would have. Do gotta love the propaganda from the Mars Hill women though. Middle ground? Honest assessment? Hell no! All men who go to Mars Hill are the best and they never print out pictures of Natalie and later glue the face to their blow up dolls at home. Wait, did I write that?
I wouldn’t call it propaganda…but the Mars Hill blogmeisters (don’t call them bloginistas!) probably wouldn’t allow “admonishment and Biblically-based criticism”. Unless it was followed up about how the guys were held accountable “from the top down.”
I listen to Driscoll online, and I appreciate that he calls men to be men. I think I’ve been more aware of the need for me to give male leaders respect when they deserve it (or haven’t done anything to lose it). However, I went to a similar church for a while, and when the excrement hit the fan, they were a boys’ club. Maybe boys need clubs, and if it helps them be more faithful to their wives, families, and communities, more power to them. As long as they don’t claim it’s the only Biblical way or that I have to be part of it. If you’re a single woman or in any situation where you don’t have a man to speak for you, you don’t have a voice in that system (unless you’re really cute and have a bunch of single guys hanging around just to get to know the real you. Wait, did that just become a system in which female sexuality is a currency…)
This was awesome. I love Burnside. And Jordan, you have made my life better. Sadly, I don’t look anything like Natalie, so none of it really matters anyways.
I have written two books about relationships for men, how to be a man instead of a guy, etc., and I’m sick to my back teeth of this sort of over-simplified, stereotyped bullshit about what it means to be a man. It’s all caricature, it’s not modeled on Christ, and it has so little substance. And I’ll also go out on a limb and say that fighting is a result of the fall and our sinful nature and has nothing to do with what God intended at creation. I vaguely recall Jesus saying something about turning the other cheek, but maybe in aramaic that actually means kick the guy’s teeth out. I’ve been in too many fights. I was a four year varsity wrestler in high school. Athleticism and competition is great, but actual combat sucks. Nobody really wins in actual fight. There are about a million ways to prove manliness, including being bold with your feelings instead of wussing out and suppressing your emotions by beating your chest and hoping no one notices that you’re frail and human. There are times to be tough and times to be weak, but this kind of message leads people to believe that toughness is their essence. And how can a friggin’ Calvinist like Driscoll deny our frailty and need for someone else to be strong on our behalf?
And since I’m not on an informal vitriol fast (though that’s a very good idea for someone like me), I have to point out that evangelical culture’s obsession with masculinity comes dangerously close misogyny sometimes. If being masculine means rejection of whatever is stereotypically feminine, then that can slide in to sexism very easily (not that always does). The whole mantra of “but I respect women!” covers up an implicit message that women that they can’t have any stereotypically masculine traits. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard a pastor from a church that doesn’t ordain women or make them deacons tell me, “But we put women in leadership roles that suit their strengths.” Gag.
Yes, a lot of guys didn’t grow up with strong male role models and need some inspiration. The problem, however, is that most men are not like this. A lot of guys, like me, were surrounded by men with tempers, like the coaches who hit us when we made mistakes and stood by grinning when teammates got in a fist fight on the field. Guys who went beyond challenging us and pushing us to be stronger to humiliating us when we screwed up. Those are the models most American men have. Yes, a lot of Christian guys need to embrace their masculinity, but I would wager that more of men need to learn how to be vulnerable instead of being assholes when they get overwhelmed. Most of us like to watch MMA and we have no problem with being manly. When that fails us, we don’t know what to do because we’re cowards with our emotions.
Thanks, Jordan. Now I don’t need my second diet coke to stay awake. Vitriol fast starting now.
Your wife is a very lucky woman.
Aw, shucks. I’m a lucky guy, too. Especially when she lets me sleep inside the house.
Well said
Steve,
I wish you had a weekly podcast.
John
I’d definitely be interested in hosting an official Burnside podcast. If it’s just me, I’d do nothing but ramble about faith and psychology to half a dozen listeners (very intelligent and good looking listeners, though they would be).
“I have to point out that evangelical culture’s obsession with masculinity comes dangerously close misogyny sometimes. If being masculine means rejection of whatever is stereotypically feminine, then that can slide in to sexism very easily (not that always does). The whole mantra of “but I respect women!” covers up an implicit message that women that they can’t have any stereotypically masculine traits. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard a pastor from a church that doesn’t ordain women or make them deacons tell me, “But we put women in leadership roles that suit their strengths.” Gag.”
THANK YOU FOR SAYING THIS! Hit the nail on the head!
Steve, awesome, thanks!
I didn’t even know where to begin responding to the video above, and then you went and said everything so well!
Thank you! As a woman in ministry, thank you for calling pastors out on this: “And since I’m not on an informal vitriol fast (though that’s a very good idea for someone like me), I have to point out that evangelical culture’s obsession with masculinity comes dangerously close misogyny sometimes. If being masculine means rejection of whatever is stereotypically feminine, then that can slide in to sexism very easily (not that always does). The whole mantra of “but I respect women!” covers up an implicit message that women that they can’t have any stereotypically masculine traits. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard a pastor from a church that doesn’t ordain women or make them deacons tell me, “But we put women in leadership roles that suit their strengths.” Gag.”
Hey guys,
I’m the (single, female) managing editor at the MH blog who did the What Women Think piece for the blog. Pastor Mark, who’s on vacation, wasn’t involved in any of this: The piece was my idea, I did the interviews, and edited it (though it didn’t take much editing).
I have a newspaper background and am very used to having people decline to talk to me. In doing these interviews, where I went around with one of our volunteer photographers and talked to women on the spot at the Ballard services, of course there were some women who didn’t want to be part of the story, but I found that the women at the MH service were overall more willing to talk with me than people in general were when I was doing stories for the newspaper. What’s more, whereas with the news stories I usually had to mine for quite a bit of material to find quotes that were relevant to my story, all the women I talked to for this piece were all giving me awesome material (and basically all said they love and support the men here because they’re pursuing Christ first and foremost), and the only content I edited out of their quotes, I did so for brevity’s sake.
Biblical manhood is not easy or evident, by any means. The point of this piece was so that the women here could support and affirm the men here at Mars Hill in their pursuit of Jesus. And the men here do have a lot of support.
Thanks and be blessed,
Holly
P.S. In a few weeks, we’re going to be tackling biblical womanhood, and you can bet the men will have a chance to tell us about the women here
Thanks for commenting, Holly! I appreciate hearing from someone at Mars Hill, and especially the blog’s managing editor, and I appreciate you providing background and for being gracious.
I wasn’t intending to make fun of your responders. (Well, maybe Natalie a little bit, just because she’s wrong about what single men are thinking.) It’s very clear those women feel safe and comfortable at Mars Hill. They wouldn’t be there otherwise.
And I apologize for getting the author wrong. No author was listed on that post, and most of the others seemed to be authored by “Pastor Mark Driscoll”.
I’ll look forward to reading this article on ‘Biblical womanhood’ Holly. I am considering writing an article myself about the inherently homosexual nature of female friendships, even between Christians. I’ll be curious to see whether this is addressed by anyone else, and what their thoughts are.
JO
Holly – good on you for commenting.
Jo – hurry up and write that article, but be sure to include as much salacious detail about how these women are inherently homosexual. That’s hot stuff.
Nicely played the the MMA -homosexual “link.” If I argue with you then I’m “protesting too much” and probably compensating for something myself.
I was waiting for you to reply!
Oh, Larry…I was trying to make a special effort not to bum you out…
In earlier drafts, I talked about how much I like watching. I still remember a fight I saw when I was very young between Royce Gracie and some Canadian guy who looked like Zangief from Street Fighter. It was one of the most incredible things I’d ever seen. It’s not like I’m an avid fan, but I’m not opposed to MMA any more than I’m opposed to football or boxing. I’d be quite a hypocrite if that were the case.
But, c’mon…there’s a little homoeroticism there…
We make fun of ourselves all the time. No harm, no foul.
Jordan, I’m sure those lines were revenge for my denouncing soccer.
ok, i think i have a man crush on you jordan. that was awesome. i cannot stand driscoll. and i probably don’t like him because i resemble him far too much. he reminds me of all that i find ugly in myself. and these are things that may just have to be.
As someone who had a man-crush on Ryan Adams for about 5 years running, I’m flattered.
Amazing post. I agree with everything.
Nice article.
The only thing I question is your claim that not a single one of those men who is friends with Natalie could be both straight and disinterested in dating her. Maybe I’m just a mutant freak, but for every girl I’m interested in dating, there are several more I’m interested in being friends with and nothing more. Is that really that strange?
No, it’s not strange, Justin, and I spoke with some hyperbole.
In early high school, the majority of my close friends were girls, and plenty of those relationships were platonic. But as I got older, and especially once I got married, it’s just unreasonable that I would spend time hanging out individually with women, at least for fun. It’s not that it’s wrong or impossible, but it’s usually not the wisest decision.
In other words, yes, i think it’s possible that some of those guys aren’t interested in Natalie.
I don’t have the book in front of me, but in “Exclusion and Embrace” by Volf, he writes that there is no such thing as a static Biblical definition of gender. What it means to be masculine or feminine is culture and it’s formed out of a constantly renewed conversation between the two genders.
That makes sense to me. I see God saying that we are to love God with all that we are and humanity as ourselves. I don’t see lists of what it means to be male or female.
I love that you referenced Volf.
Just saying.
Jordan— Has anyone challenged the idea that LeeAnne is only 23? Fact check.
OMG! Did you know, that Dracula used to have his nails extracted?
I listen to Mark from time to time and enjoy listening. I also enjoyed the story I was king of expecting a bashing but di dnot see one. Also it’s only gay if you make eye contact. (Talking about MMA)
Hahahaha! “I don’t think there’s anything purer than two guys in a cage.” Oh LORD.