Why you shouldn’t care what a woman thinks

Cane Caldo is no longer permitting comments from female readers on his blog.

As I’ve maintained: I write this blog for present and future husbands and fathers. Today that sentiment will become more visible. From now on, comments from women will be deleted. My hope is that this will encourage a more brotherly atmosphere. It is doubted in my mind if there has ever been a time or place where men (even Christian men) could talk frankly–and hear earnestly–in the presence of audible women (even Christian women).

This made me think of a piece of advice I recently had to give a friend. This friend works in the denominational offices of a church, and the church he works for operates several schools from grade schools through colleges. He told me that he can’t find women to show interest in within his denomination because the “the liberal ones are all for feminism and aren’t really into being wives, and the conservative ones would probably want to homeschool. I mean, I’m all for homeschooling, but since I work for the church I feel like I would need to send my kids to the church school.”

My response was “You need to stop caring about women’s beliefs.”

See, he fell into the trap of looking for someone that already held all of the same positions as he did. That’s never going to happen. Women are different than men. Women think differently than men. And that’s a good thing. As I told my friend “Your call is to lead your family, not to find someone that you don’t have to lead because they already think exactly how you would lead them.”

If my friend finds a woman who is willing to join herself to him and follow his leading, then it doesn’t matter if her current ideas conflict with the direction he will be leading. All that matters is whether she will follow his lead. This is why Cane’s move is a good one.

See, the men who go to Cane’s place go to learn how to better lead their wives and family in accordance with scripture. However, it is easy to get side-tracked in the comments and start worrying about how Christian women want to be led. The question about how Christian women want to be led is an irrelevant distraction from the question of how the Bible says one ought to lead.

It is impossible to lead by asking the led which direction they wish to be led at every crossroad. Yet this is how many Christian men approach the idea of leading their family. A proper leader insists on the path toward the final destination, even when the led think a different path looks more appealing.

Hopefully, the new atmosphere at Cane’s place will help men tune out for a moment the voices behind them proclaiming the beauty and ease of every crossing path, and focus instead on the final destination, and the path over which he must lead to safely deliver his family there.

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “Why you shouldn’t care what a woman thinks

  1. @Cane
    I’m contemplating whether I need to follow suit. My focus is somewhat different than yours, and I get far fewer comments, but I could see female commenters creating distraction should commenting pick up in the future.

    Like

  2. Moose, another approach is to automatically moderate all women. If they have something valuable or insightful to say, you can let through. If not, it never sees the light.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Like

  3. That is an incredibly slippery slope. For one, not everybody has a name that makes it readily apparent what their gender is. Two, not everybody agrees to one strict interpretation of gender – for some it’s binary for others it’s fluid. Three, Jesus was famous for communicating with women; it does not bode well to not follow his example. And Four, women are your mothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, friends, nieces, co-workers, and so much more, if you consider them to be your equal then you must care about what they think or else you miss out on their perspective. Their contribution to Christianity is so much more than our historians tell us. Let us not make the same mistake of discounting them for future generations.

    Like

  4. @Jamie Carter
    Your comment is hilarious. I’m only bothering to engage it because this blog is a place for growing, and I will always try to help one grow here before consigning them to their own foolishness. Keep that in mind should you respond.

    You’re right, some ambiguous names–like yours–would be allowed. See Cane’s piece for why that’s not a big deal.

    Secondly, this is an explicitly Christian blog for young men, so we aren’t going to deal with confused people who think it’s possible to be something other than male or female “Male and female created HE them.”

    Third, Jesus was not “famous for communicating with women.” Nowhere in the Bible does it say “The fame of his conversations with women proceeded him.”

    Fourth, men and women are different. Different things can never be equal. And there is certainly no lack of female perspective in this world today.

    Finally, I find it interesting that you know more than historians about the historical contributions of women to Christianity. Through what means have you come to this superior knowledge?

    Like

  5. Jesus interacted with a number of women on a number of occasions. He always heard them out respectfully. His treatment of women should be an example to the church. In the case of Mary of Martha, he did not confirm gender roles, but allowed for Mary to sit with his disciple and learn from him just as they were. Do you remember reports that Christians took in plague victims? Who cared for them? Men and women did together, risking their own lives to see to it that these strangers did not die alone. Christianity tends to record the thoughts and contribution of men, but it wouldn’t have lasted were it not for it’s women. Today happens to be International Women’s Day, it seems to be an odd occasion to choose to silence women unless they’re all that threatening. Are you worried they’d tell you that you’re wrong?

    Like

  6. @Jamie Carter

    Today happens to be International Women’s Day, it seems to be an odd occasion to choose to silence women unless they’re all that threatening. Are you worried they’d tell you that you’re wrong?

    Not allowing women to comment on a small men’s blog isn’t silencing them: if they want they can start their own blog.

    I’m sure some women would tell me I’m wrong, but if you had actually read the article you are commenting on, you would know that doesn’t bother me in the least.

    Like

  7. And if I had? What are we, a Pink and Blue Church? Women over there and men over here? You say that different things can’t be equal. I say they can.

    Like

  8. Equal
    noun
    1. a person or thing considered to be the same as another in status or quality.

    What of people of color?

    Like

  9. When you say that “men and women are equal” the word equal is an adjective. So you have to look at the definition of equal as an adjective, not as a noun.

    I am quickly losing patience with your lack of sincerity. You would do well to read through both my archives and Cane’s archives before commenting here again.

    Like

  10. One ought to consider what a woman thinks. If she doesn’t think men have been given the responsibility and she needs to submit to her husband as part of submitting to Christ, Next her with extreme prejudice.

    People of color are not equal because they aren’t the same. No two persons are the same, even identical twins. They are better or worse depending on the metric. Are dwarfs and giants equal? Are those with Downs’ syndrome and MIT graduates equal? There are people of color smarter and dumber, better (morally) or worse than me. I’m told to respect, learn from, and emulate those who are or whose example is better.

    God is infinite, so we are all equal in that we are fallen and finite. But to whom much is given, much will be required and everyone’s endowment from God is different. The Bible makes the husband king of the castle, but it also points out that crown is of thorns, not gold. The last shall be first. I don’t want to be responsible for my eventual wife, but will be. Pastors and teachers are responsible for their charges. Bishops for their diocese.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Perhaps the problem is that your logic is flawed. A noun is a person, place or thing. An adjective is a word that gives more information about the noun that goes with it. A person is not a thing. People are equal. a man and a woman are both people. A white person and a person of color are also people, more than that, they are all equal people. I assure you that I am free from pretense, deceit, or hypocrisy (that is, the definition of sincere.) Because to me all people are equal, therefore their opinions are of equal value to me.

    Like

  12. @jamie Carter

    Congratulations. I was considering whether or not I should follow Cane’s lead on this, and you have convinced me. Should you wish to comment in the future, be sure to use the handle James Carter. And seriously, read the archives before you embarrass yourself any further.

    Like

  13. Pingback: Moratorium on female commenters | Moose Norseman

  14. Moose, from what I understand, moderation can be used instead of a ban. Just as first time commenters are automatically moderated, you can put someone in that status permanently. Leave women in moderation, then approve comments on an individual basis.

    This Jamie Curtis creature is using SJW language. I would be careful about allowing it to comment further.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Liked by 1 person

  15. So by your logic person is “nothing”? Well then, all nothings are equal.
    If you are distinguishing, a person is a subject, other things are objects. One distinction is that it is evil to use persons or to treat them as objects. (Theology of the Body by Pope John Paul II).
    People are also far from equal. Some will end up in heaven, others in hell.

    Because to me all people are equal, therefore their opinions are of equal value to me.

    Liars and truth tellers are of equal value? Irrationality and rationality? Sanity and psychotic ramblings?
    Schoenberg and Bach were both composers, both people, but they are of opposite value, I will pause and hearken to Bach, but do what it takes to block atonality.

    I am, however, open to listening to the opinions of all people, since in that it is possible to judge the merits of those opinions. Are they simply regurgitating talking points they do not understand so are no better than a parrot or Mina bird? If they are based on something, can I follow their logic?

    There are many people whose opinions I respect but disagree with. There are also many people whose opinions I don’t respect although I superficially agree with because they have no clue.

    But even your idea the “all people are equal” itself is an opinion. And our host has a different opinion. Yet you claim all opinions are of equal value to you – so that must include both your own opinion and our host’s, as well as mine. So if you don’t even value your own opinion more than his or mine, why do you waste time stating it, or at least not give dozens more opinions across the spectrum that many other people hold from total equality to total inequality since these are all of equal value to you?

    Like

  16. @TSK

    Moose, from what I understand, moderation can be used instead of a ban. Just as first time commenters are automatically moderated, you can put someone in that status permanently. Leave women in moderation, then approve comments on an individual basis.

    The upkeep of moderation can get out of hand pretty fast. There are basically three settings for moderation in WordPress.

    1) Every comment is in moderation until an admin releases it.

    2) Comments by first-time commenters are held in moderation until it is approved by an admin. From that point on, all comments by the same user are automatically approved. This is the option used by almost all the WordPress blogs in the Men’s Sphere, and the one I use.

    3) Enter a username, email address, or website (or parts of those) into a moderated comments filter. Users with info matching any of those are held in moderation until approved regardless of whether previous comments have been approved.

    I’m going to continue with option 2) because it is the easiest at this point. Time management is key here as I am not a professional blogger.

    I suspect that none of the women who currently read my blog try to take advantage of it. Frankly, I think the most likely course of negative action is that WordPress suspends my account.

    Like

  17. @TSK

    If sex is fluid. Why not race? Since I feel black on the inside I am transethnic. All you need is a little surgery:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645950/I-fun-bein-Korean-Blonde-Brazilian-man-undergoes-extraordinary-surgery-achieve-convincing-Oriental-look.html

    And I feel itchy too which means I am slowly turning into a wolf when I look down ,my legs look hairy, I must be growing fur. You cisgender white male you must accept my tranethnic and otherkin status. Have a great day shit lords.

    Like

  18. Cane, if the policy is spelled out, then women are not likely to comment anyway. Nearly all the benefits of banning women, but you can get the occasional valuable comment by same. If I ever start a blog, I would go with option three; instead of putting women in the banned list, they would be in the moderated list. Some women would still be banned, of course, and a very rare few would be allowed to comment freely.

    That being said, your blog, your rules. I am not arguing with you, but offering Moose an opinion. Either way it happens, it needs doing.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Like

  19. Infowarrior, I am unsure as to which part of my comment you are responding, but my preferred derogative is homo rapeiens. I demand you respect my preferences when you disrespect me.

    As a cisviking, I express my cultural identity by rapine and slaughter, and as you are a wolf, I declare you wolf head. A state of hostility must exist until you are no longer a wolf.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Like

  20. @moosenorseman

    Let’s say I pretended to agree with Jamie and pretended to be another social justice warrior as well as taking the twisted absurdity of their ideology further. Although the otherkin is actually a real phenomenon among those overgrown children.

    Like

  21. Moose, I figured something like that, but I decided to play along. Except for the cisviking part–on that point I am quite serious.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Liked by 1 person

  22. @TSK

    Cane, if the policy is spelled out, then women are not likely to comment anyway.

    Usually, but the angrier she is, the less likely she cares about the rules. It’s not uncommon for what I say to upset a woman.

    Women alone aren’t the issue. Many times a woman, often married, will make a sensible comment only to have a man come out of the woodwork and start pedestalizing her and trying to show he’s one of the “god guys”. Nine times out of ten he’s looking for attention in the wrong place.

    Let’s ignore all the rules for a minute and just focus on the fact that she’s a married: Should we approve of closeness between men and married women? I cannot.

    I am not arguing with you

    Understood, and nor I with you. Just discussing the logistics.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Cane, even if she us angry, she still hits the moderation filter, and then you leave her comments there.

    As to married women and men, you have a good point there. However, the moderation gets around that, because the men who engage in that type of behavior receive no validation or attention. The limited access that women would have precludes conversations that could become inappropriate. I would also strongly consider moderating any man like that. Effeminate men are little better than women themselves, and can often be much worse.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Like

  24. @TSK
    ”The limited access that women would have precludes conversations that could become inappropriate. I would also strongly consider moderating any man like that. Effeminate men are little better than women themselves, and can often be much worse.”

    The reason that many pedestalizers(or drones) and white knights gets attracted in the 1st place is due to the presence of women.

    The absence of women will ensue that most of the simps do not get attracted in the 1st place however for the effeminate men that do come in in spite of those measure should be moderated.

    Men invariably change in the presence of women whether they comments are good or not.

    Like

  25. In case you were looking for more support, look to see what’s happened to Return of Kings since the female ban was lifted.

    Yeah, exactly.

    Like

  26. That, and Return of Kings is for profit, meaning that page views and clicks earn them money, meaning that allowing women increases revenue (at least in the short term). It’s all about that papa’, yo!

    Like

Please read Comments Policy prior to posting

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s