Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Rachel Marie Stone

What Your Husband Isn’t Telling You

Last updated on: October 23, 2012 at 6:00 am   by Rachel Marie Stone

What Your Husband Isn’t Telling You 2012-10-23T06:00:40-04:00 Rachel Marie Stone

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Posting as part of the Patheos Book Club discussion.

As the mother of two boys who never watch television and only rarely see movies, it seems clear to me that the urge to fight and to defend is pretty much inborn in most males. Oh, I’ve tried to encourage their nurturing nature; they’ve had baby dolls and toy strollers, but they played with these for a mere fraction of the time spent with toy vehicles and various improvised weapons. More than once I’ve caught them lashing baby dolls to chairs for interrogation sessions. They didn’t learn this from movies. It’s just in there, somehow.

David Murrow’s discussion of men–and what they need from their wives–in his What Your Husband Isn’t Telling You relies heavily on evolutionary psychology to explain the male of the species, although he posits God’s design, rather than the long process of evolution, as key to the formation of the male psyche. Once I heard a similar argument from a homeschool lecturer on why boys ‘need’ to play with toy weapons: because “God made them to be protectors.” Need I mention that a certain Seattle-based megachurch pastor relies heavily on this view of masculinity?

Reading Murrow’s book, I was reminded, however improbably, of Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English’s excellent book, For Her Own Good: Two Centuries of the Experts’ Advice to Women and their earlier pamphlet, Witches, Midwives, and Nurses: A History of Women Healers. In these books, the authors show how, in pre-industrial societies, women were (and in places in this world, are) at least as much “providers” as men are: responsible for gardening and small scale farming, for fiber and textile production, and for many other things. In industrial societies, what a woman’s ‘place’ should be was less clear.

Murrow sees men’s troubles as stemming largely from their being displaced from their “natural” roles as provider and protector; attributing a large portion of the blame to women’s rights and equality in the workplace, to the “feminizing” of culture (including church culture) and asserting that men are happier when their wives cook for them, keep themselves in shape, and don’t “outshine” them in prayer, among other things. Okay…

I get Murrow’s points: men are different from women, and there are many aspects of life that work better for a female brain than a male one. School, for example–especially in the early grades–is an institutional environment largely shaped by women, and as such tends to favor the way girls and women prefer to learn and interact. Boys would probably do better, for example, in classrooms that allowed them to move as they learn–to bounce a ball as they review math facts, say, or to actually manipulate materials with their hands as the physical or chemical properties are narrated to them.

But what always bothers me about the discussion of men as they are “created” (or evolved) to behave is the assumption that what is ‘natural’ is what men and women are bound to perform, to ‘live into,’ as the church-jargon sometimes has it. Sure, it’s “natural” to compete for the healthiest, most fertile women. It’s “natural” to feel aggression, to want to hunt and fight and protect and defend. We can acknowledge that while also acknowledging that none of us is bound to the baser expressions of our natures–especially when we consider that Jesus did the most unnatural thing imaginable, and let himself be killed, which is hardly a good way to pass on one’s genes.

Then again, maybe, in God’s strange economy, it is.

Uncategorized

boys and violence

david murrow

evolutionary psychology

nature and grace

Patheos Book Club

raising boys

what your husband isn't telling you

Previous Post



October 22, 2012

The Groaning Table

Next Post



October 24, 2012 Humbled, Grateful & Slightly Terrified--Eat with Joy: Redeeming God's Gift of Food--Now Available for Pre-order!


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category "health" activism agriculture animals anorexia Anticipating anxiety art autumn Baking beauty beer Bible Big Food binge eating blogging body image Books Bread of Life breastfeeding brokenness candy cartoons celebrity chefs children chocolate Classical Duckfaces Connecting consumption cooking creation care creativity current events death Dessert diabetes Dieting Eating Together Emotional Eating fair trade Faith Family Fannie Farmer fast food fat talk Films Food Food Policy formula feeding Gardening gluten free Grace gratitude guest posts guilt HIV/AIDS holiday hospitality housekeeping Jesus Joy just for fun Justice kindness Local media moment of joy north fork, long island OI parties personal pharmaceuticals photo photography plumpy'nut popular culture poverty pregnancy Preserving real food recipes rest restaurants School Food Seasons spring starvation summer Table Talk taste television theology travel Tuesdays With Fannie Uncategorized winter

Select a Month April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 August 2014 May 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Twitter



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which king had dreams interpreted by Daniel?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Belshazzar Ahasuerus Nebuchadnezzar Darius

Related posts from Rachel Marie Stone

Progressive Christian

Maybe You Need To Say To Your Food...

Rachel Marie Stone

Progressive Christian

Sacrilege: Finding Life in the Unorthodox Ways of...

Rachel Marie Stone

Progressive Christian

Are Women 'More than Enchanting'?

Rachel Marie Stone

Progressive Christian

@stickyJesus: loving your online neighbor

Rachel Marie Stone

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian

Brandy Anderson, Team Weird, and Transcending Church

I met author Brandy Anderson on Heretic Happy Hour, when podcaster Keith...

Why Christians Have a Sacred Duty to Vote:...

The Bible offers strong support for the sacred duty to vote. Here...

What Being a Modern-Day Apostle Means to Me

In my last column, I discussed the ins and outs of modern-day...

Did Ancient China Once Worship the God of...

Across human history, a common thread weaves through the origins of the...

Love Your Neighbor – Including Earth-Kin: Lev. 19,...

God’s command to love your neighbor means acting in an ethical and...

Lead a Church Study of “Jesus and Lao...

Guest writer Jack Thomas (The Irreverent Reverend) reflects on leading his church...

view all Progressive Christian blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube