To subscribe to our weekly Faith and Family Findings: click here.
gender

gender

Great Mothers Lead — But Where Are the Fathers?

Tags: , , , , , , , adolescent sexuality, boys, family, family structure, fathers, feminism, gender, homosexual parents, intact family, MARRI, Pat Fagan, sexuality, Uncategorized No comments

Ana Samuel, inA Message to Mayor Pete, writes about the penetration of the radical effort to distort the sexuality of every child in America.  It is brilliant in its appeal and argument ,and wonderful in its recognition of the dignity of every person in the LGBT movement.  It says, from a mother’s perspective, everything I see, think and feel from a from a therapist’s point of view and from a social scientist’s knowledge of the data in these fields.  What is happening— these are my words, not hers— is child sexual abuse perpetrated by government (state and local) through our educational system, across the nation. It is corrupting almost everything it touches: education, medicine, college tenure, research publication, journalism and even the clergy.  It flies in the face of what the data say, and instead of leading children in the ways of a thriving adulthood is deliberately sacrificing their health, happiness, income and education on the altar of an anti-human, ideology, that has nothing to do with the dignity of each person, including the dignity of the lesbian woman, gay man, or transgendered person, behind whom they hide.  These folks and their children are also pawns sacrificed on the very same altar. 

It is wonderful to have a brilliant, articulate woman and mother defend our children.  But are there any men around?  Do men still protect their children, or do they now leave it all to the women and hide behind their skirts?  Men need to step up too.  Or have the radical feminists succeeded in their goal of  eliminating “patriarchs”?

Comments welcome from men (and women) after you have read this brilliant piece.

May her work thrive.

For the good of the child, the future of our nation,

Pat Fagan, Ph.D.

A Deliberate Rejection of “Traditional” Men

Tags: , , , , boys, culture, gender, MARRI, men, Pat Fagan, Uncategorized No comments

The last blog before the Christmas/New Year break was “Rebuilding our nation, one son at a time” which laid out the work a father implicitly takes on with the birth of his child.  Since then the American Psychological Association (APA) issued Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Men and Boys, causing an uproar among “traditional value” folk who felt (reasonably so, as a quick read of the preamble and the titles of the guidelines will indicate). Two practicing psychologists have severe critiques that give substance to concerns of the layfolk: Dr. Sean Smith of Denver and Dr. Leonard Sax (psychologist and physician) of Maryland. That many of the members of APA likely agree with them is beside the point. The leadership of APA is determined to push the nation in a direction abhorrent to most of its citizens.

In reaction to the backlash APA issued a statement that some see as backpedaling but is in reality a digging in their heels: the president of APA and the two most recent past presidents weigh in on the side of the guidelines.

The three APA presidents state:

“We honor and respect the overwhelmingly majority of boys and men who aim to live fully human lives while valuing the dignity of all others. In short, Division 51 [author of the Guidelines] of the American Psychological Association believes the following:

Division 51 seeks to recognize and promote pathways for boys and men to live healthy and positive lives, [emphasis added] and also to identify and redress the effects of restrictive masculinities[1]. We do this through psychological science, education, advocacy, and clinical practice. In doing so, we aim to promote equality for people of all genders.”

This is not true. 

Let me give preliminary background before presenting the evidence to support my harsh retort: The guidelines are part of a set.  The other part is the almost-identical-twin guidelines for Psychological Practice with Women and Girls, issued in 2007. Two large working groups put in over 30 years of study, meetings, conferences and publications, all aimed at producing these two documents.  This is serious, deliberate project by a lot of highly intelligent, highly educated people, all of whom claim to be scientists, and members of a world-ranking organization that weighs in often as a scientific organization, e.g. in its Supreme Court amici briefs.

What is the evidence that the statement of the three presidents is not true?  In neither set of Guidelines nor in any of the years of research, conferences nor publications leading up to them, is there even the slightest attempt to “recognize and promote pathways for boys and men to live healthy and positive lives” in the traditional way of marriage and the regular practice of the worship of God (manifested in all cultures, over all of history).  Nowhere in any of the text of the two Guidelines, nor in any of the science cited, is there any indication that they acknowledge this widest of pathways, which is as visible as a 12-lane highway.  The data is staring them in the face, and is overwhelming in every federal survey,  but they treat these uncomfortable facts with that sort of contempt which makes itself clear when one turns one’s back on another. This is deliberate, not an oversight.   Also, it shows a total lack of interest in real social science, which will let the data fall where it will.

I like Dr. Sean Smith’s advice: If you need a psychologist (and there are many great psychologists, doing great and needed work), make sure to ask him (or her) about his stance on these guidelines. If he does not give a firm “NO — I do not support or agree with them” walk away from him and find a trust-worthy psychologist, one who will honor you and the traditions from which you come.

In sum these guidelines are an abuse of both therapists and clients: Placing ideology above the needs of vulnerable people in trouble seeking help.


[1] “Masculinities” is a neologism to be rejected and challenged whenever thrust upon you. It embodies the radical agenda within its meaning.

Sexuality

abortion, gender, sexuality 3 comments

For men, women are the most desirable of all in God’s creatures.  Not only Adam has had this experience, all is descendants do too, and have their own ranking of the “desirability-from-afar” of women.  However, all men also learn (as do women about men) that up close and real many high rankings crumble because intrinsic to her desirability is her goodness.  Nobody but the insanely lustful wants a physically beautiful woman who comes with major vices. Which, sadly, brings us to “the modern woman”.

The search for the beginning of the end of Western Civilization can go back quite a distance, well into the middle ages.  I vote for Ockham, though others will go further backwards or forward.  But, within the modern maze of cracking foundations many would point to the acceptance of abortion in law as the most significant change. It changed, and was designed to change, the status of all women in law.  In social relations it also changed the more hidden status of those women who bought into it — who accepted “non-marital sex with abortion as backup insurance”.  Such women, at heart, are very different from those who reject regime.   Unwittingly, most of these new women have embraced grave evils.  They are changed and in this they are totally different from women “of old”.

And the men who welcome these new women are of the same heart, and probably even worse because they will have in spades that vice easily inflamed in the male:  to lust after many women, not just one.  He will be prone to lust after, use and then discard the woman of the moment as soon as the next desirable one comes along.  Enter myriad Harvey Weinsteins.   But, in this new regime, no man can be really at ease for all know we have a Harvey close within, locked up, we hope, but in a jail easily broken out of.

There is a real justice to the pursuit of Harvey and his imitators, no doubt, but  I am not sure there is much virtue to it because the rather immediate root causes (abortion as backup to sex outside of marriage) are still sacred cows in the religion of the accusers and the courts of the enforcers.

I am sure it has amazed all men — sexually virtuous or not, guilty as Harvey or not — who have seen some of the accusers still dressing in a way that is real “sexual harassment” of all men.  In effect these women say: “I present myself physically to you so that you will lust after me, but don’t you dare present yourself physically to me in response.  Do that and you will end up in court, hopefully in jail.”  It seems they are flaunting a legally protected form of sexual harassment.

This highlights the modern dilemma for Western civilization and its laws: it has lost its bearings on what it is to be a man and to be a woman, but is not yet prepared to go for deep reform on the difference, the intimate connection between male and female, where the connection which balances that difference is the child.

However, modern sexual relations are legally premised on the exclusion of the child, both in contraception and in abortion.  Yet that very child is the anchor of civilization, its compass and its destination. But no one is talking child as they talk Harvey Weinstein.  And most would think it crazy to bring the child into this conversation. And they are right.  In the modern world it is crazy, most especially in court, where the child, the ultimate victim is not admitted as witness, not even as observer.  Such is the constipated justice in this deserved but exacerbating pursuit of the Harvey Weinsteins of the world.

It used to be true that women were the cause of men becoming civilized.  Today the woman who rejects the child in “contraception + abortion” is incapable of being such a civilizing source.  Now the power to grow civilization lies neither with the man nor the woman but with the one between them — the most powerless of all, their child.  But power provides no path to the child, only love does.  And the love that unites man, woman and child —overwhelmingly is God.  So the data show.

When the child is front and center in all matters sexual the world will have found its way forward again.  And it will be easier for all men to keep their Harvey in jail.

Masculinity and Feminism

feminism, gender, men No comments

Men need to do something because radical Feminism has triumphed:  Where in today’s culture do we see promoted the cultural ideal of the good male patriarch, the husband of the natural family and the ideal for all of human history of young men who aspire to be good.    The radical feminists have massively changed the thought patterns, the mores, the education, the entertainment and the legal system and left us with more and more failing men, or men “stuck” in life.   We have more and more “Peter Pans” – not by their wish or self-design but as a result of their malnourished formation.

Just as plants thrive in the right conditions so too do boys thrive if born into a good ‘patriarchal’ family in which the father leads by loving and educating his children (just as his wife does in her way).  Young men today are victims of an environment constructed over fifty years of sustained, intense, focused and savvy work by the feminist movement.

Feminism has altered every major institution in the nation: the churches and seminaries, the academy and doctoral programs, the courts and the law schools, the media and journalism schools, medicine and medical schools, government bureaucracies at all levels, teachers unions and education schools, national and state curricula for grade schools, high schools and colleges; the major educational publishers, librarian unions and public library books for children down to pre-K levels.

In all these areas one theme dominates: all women are victims everywhere and all men are the victimizers, fathers of families in particular.   (Next time you are at the library go to the children’s room and review the books to see how the father in the family is treated—made to look like an incapable fool and dispensable to a family).

Feminists care not a whit that boys have fallen behind on virtually every educational measure of importance.  If Title IX had any meaning every penny would now be spent on helping boys and young men catch up on girls and young women.

Current sexual mores have deprived most children of the benefits of the intact married family life with their parents (by age 17 only 46% of American children are living in such a family). The sexual discrimination against boys is massive: they are deprived of their biological adult male father in their home. Imagine how feminists would be howling if the reverse were true—if girls were deprived of their biological mothers in similar numbers.  The effects are logical and very visible: relatively more and more weak men.

Sexual abuse of children is “through the roof” and pandemic among welfare families in the inner city, which renders them incapable of intact family life in their adulthood – the desired outcome for radical feminism.

Feminism is aided and abetted by modernity’s intellectual habit of denial and dismissal of reality and realities:

In education, the data are convincingly repetitive: the intact married family that worships God weekly yields the best results. However, most social science professors are in full denial of this and refuse to entertain even the discussion of it even though religious attendance may be the single most powerful variable in increasing educational performance. Virtually no one knows this.  Least of all parents and teachers.

Likewise science is increasingly ideological (i.e. at the service of the dominant power interests be they corporate, feminists or political ideology).  Academic freedom is a thing of the past.

In economics and government: the denial of debt accumulated and the continued living on national IOU’s by federal, state and city legislatures has huge effects on young men whose burdens of too-heavy education debts stops many from thinking of marriage because they cannot be a provider.

In constitutional law all the major reinterpretations are the fruits of radical feminism.  Our families have suffered immensely in the new legal regime.

Good men have to take the initiative in their own hands and begin to assess their predicament: how boys and girls – their children, are affected.

The solution will have to be a masculine one (it cannot but be so). Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus. Men and women do best together when they complement each other.  Men have to find their way back to Mars.  Though it will be different from John Wayne’s America, manly men of all cultures recognize the strength (or weakness) of other men no matter their culture.  Masculine strength is manifest in their willingness to suffer in order to provide for their families and to protect their communities.  On matters of family men are very different from women.

It is time for a new revolution – founded on the justice due a good man and founded on the need to rebuild the culture that each child needs, a culture that honors good men and especially good married fathers. The way out of this mess will be very different from the way into it.  It is time for men to begin to assess the present and explore future options.

Christian Culture

church, culture, Dating, gender, MARRI, marriage, young adults No comments

By: Avery Pettway, MARRI Intern
      Joshua Kelsey, MARRI Intern

The “2014 State of Dating in America” study, conducted by ChristianMingle and JDate, examines the dating behavior of Christian young adults. The study’s most ominous finding is the rapidly growing Christian acceptance of sex outside of marriage.  When asked if they would have sex before marriage, 63% of Christian young adults answered yes, and only 13% said no.  When asked how far into the relationship it was acceptable for the couple to move in together, 27% said after six months of dating, 30% said after a year of dating, and only 13% said it was only acceptable after marriage.

This data does not describe the US population at large—this is the state of things within Christendom (or at least the Christendom according to Christian Mingle and JDate). With thoughts like this harbored in Christian minds throughout our land, it makes sense that marriage is falling apart in our country, divorce rates are remarkably high, and the definition of sexuality is in perpetual flux.  Such research should shock and disturb Christians—the church, after all, ought to be the solution, not the problem.  Our biblical roadmap shows us the way to joyously hold out the single answer to how things work. Shouts of solutions, remedies and programs reverberate through our social conversation, but evidence of their success is grim.  As Christians leave the voice of true reason (divine design), they will enter the age of parenting in the midst of moral and ideological chaos. What follows is that our next generation of children will be raised outside God’s paradigm—they will be the first generation, in theory, to have no background of stability.  The current generation is rebelling against a standard they despise—the next generation won’t be rebels so much as followers of the new social norm.

How can we Christians who hope for cultural redemption fight chaotic societal trends when 63% of our own are captivated by the same trends?  Christian leaders are frustrated, saddened, even angered, by the socio-sexual battle cries thundering against any righteous standard they uphold.  The homosexual marriage movement is gaining ground, more children are born out of wedlock, and cohabitation is increasing — all working to undermine the bedrock of society, the family.  We as Christians expect the unbelieving world to choose its own paths, to stray from God’s design.  Throughout the ages, in varied cultural contexts, societies have turned towards sexual disobedience (among other kinds)—and, one by one, have fallen from splendor. We also know that God’s call to His own people is to turn from sexual immorality, to be set apart, and, most shiver-inducing of all: Be holy, for I am Holy. We adhere to His design for the sexual out of obedience to the Creator of sexuality.  We adhere because…it works.  Simply put, His design makes sense.  He created sexuality, and therefore His way works.

And yet even self-proclaimed followers of God are so blind in the sexual arena.  Society’s proposed sexual system only leads to chaos—first within family relationships, leading to breakdowns in the other key institutions.  In what other context does society so energetically encourage actions that blatantly do not work?  The family (and how sexuality is conducted within this framework) is the root of a functioning society, the stream feeding the tree that grows the branches of government, of economy, of education, etc.  The United States will struggle to maintain any coherent identity or global presence if we continue on this road.
The people of God have always been the symbol of hope.  In theory, we know what it is that works. This is where we mourn the most tragic part of our national story—Christians are following the tide. Those entrusted with the beautiful knowledge of how to grow a thriving society are putting such wisdom aside and stepping into chaos with the rest.

Many think that people leave the Faith and then become sexually promiscuous. But as the State of Dating in America study showed, this is simply not the case.  An increasing many are maintaining their Christian title while adopting the cultural standards of their choice.  We should not simply force our adolescents to sit in church pews. We must teach children of relational beauty, young people of sexual wholeness. We must reach out to the young Christian adults facing a sexually chaotic culture, come beside them, and help them discover true sexual order. We must seek to restore faithful zeal, but also to restore sexual clarity and obedience. We must, with care, ask sexuality and religion to lead each other hand-in-hand away from the pit that consumes them. Only then, when our own Christian culture has changed and sex is honored among us, can we have a hope at all of changing the secular culture and thus offering our nation a happy end.

May I have this [politically-correct, gender-ambiguous, tolerance-driven] dance?

child well-being, culture, education, family, gender, single parents 1 comment
By Lindsay Smith, Intern
By now you have probably heard the story: a single mom felt her daughter was being excluded from a school function, and voilà, no more father-daughter dances or mother-son baseball games in Rhode Island’s Cranston school district.  According to the superintendent, these events violate gender discrimination laws.  This mom, this superintendent, these lawyers were probably just trying to prevent kids from getting hurt, at least we will give the benefit of the doubt to their motives.  However, I am all too concerned about what research reveals: banning events like these harms the entire student body. 
Parents are important. Not surprisingly, abundant research supports this truth, especially in education.  On average, children from intact married families earn higher test scores, have higher high school GPAs, are less likely to drop out of school, and have better behavior than their peers.  In addition, “adolescent children of single-parent families or stepfamilies reported that their parents had lower educational expectations for them, were less likely to monitor schoolwork, and supervised social activities less than the parents of children in intact biological families.”  Based on these findings, one can see parental involvement directly correlates with academic success.  
 
Sadly, Cranston’s ruling reduces parental involvement, which at its core is fruitful to the district.  Cranston removed events which promote positive interaction.   I have never been employed as a teacher, but I would imagine most educators are thankful for engaged and helpful parents.  While I am not a teacher, I was a student, and can verify that involved parents, whether my own or another child’s, positively impacted my classroom experience.    The student body benefits when parents invest in education, in the school, and in the school’s activities.  The mayor of Cranston summarizes these findings well when he said, “[The events] contribute to the well being of our children as a whole.”Fathers taking their daughters to a school dance is positive.  Mothers taking their sons to a school baseball game is good, not because it promotes a child’s exclusion, but because it encourages parental participation. 
I do believe every child should have the chance to benefit from these activities.  I do believe every child can have an equal opportunity to attend – not by minimizing the traditional family (gender roles included) but by promoting it.  I heard it said once, “The problem is not that we have too much of Christ in our marriage; it’s that we don’t have enough.”  The same principle applies here.  People are not excluded because there is too little family love but because there is not enough.  Let me put some concrete words to this theory. 
Growing up, both sets of my grandparents lived over 10 hours away.  It wasn’t practical for them to attend my school functions.  However, when it came time for “Grandparentslunch day” at my elementary school, our sweet, elderly neighbor or my friend’s grandmother would always show up to eat with me.  Would I have liked my biological grandparents to be there?  Absolutely, but that doesn’t negate the wonderful times I had with these women who sacrificed their time for me.  I felt special; I felt loved; I felt included.    I propose a better solution is not to eliminate the event, but rather to embrace the child.  Allow traditional families to show what love and support look like and invite a child whose mom or dad can’t attend, whatever the reason.  Surely there are fathers, grandfathers, uncles, mentors in this community who would gladly take this young girl to the dance.  I bet there are mothers, grandmothers, aunts, teachers, who would gladly take another boy to the baseball game with their family.  Support the family, and support these traditions not in spite of the students but for their betterment.  When the family is stronger, education is stronger, and that’s something that should make us all get up and dance.