Damn was I wrong!

May I submit that a difference of ‘logic’ might, in reality, be a difference of priorities? That women are concerned about the inner workings of a heartfelt relationship with Jesus Christ, while men in Western culture are more comfortable depating obscure academic points which have little to nothing to do with walking with Christ?

(Ouch, I know.)

That is to say, in our culture it’s not so easy to be spiritual David. (You cry and write poetry and dance around in your underwear lately? No? I didn’t think so… me either, actually, except the crying part.)

Also, we tend to define masculinity as whatever femininity *isn’t*.

All of that being said, as a woman interested in obscure intellectual questions, I’ve had a short lifetime of not fitting in at church. All the cigar smoking men look at me funny, and all the scrapbooking women look at me funny, and all I can do is sigh and think, “Jesus you might look at me funny, too, but at least I know you love me.”

I hope to see some good discussion. I’ll be lurking. (Promise, not a threat. ^^)

I’m reminded of a scene in the movie “Capote” where at a party filled with NY literary types, a man approaches Harper Lee. “I hear you have a book coming out.” She nods. “A children’s book, right?” he says, “something about a bird?”
Lee wrote To Kill a Mockingbird.

In this world, you shall have affliction.

Or, to quote a different writer:

Inigo Montoya: Who are you?
Westley: No one of consequence.
Inigo Montoya: I must know…
Westley: Get used to disappointment.
Inigo Montoya: ‘kay…

Re emotions, I read ‘yo ho ho, a papist’s life for me?’ and it was a bit like watching an action movie. I was squirming with anxiety for the first 3/4s and breathed an enormous sigh of relief at the end. I’d much rather you had given assurance at the outset that you had analyzed it all and rejected it. Instead of saying ‘I’m tired of Protestantism. I’m tired of every man with his Bible being a little Pope’, you could say ‘Although Protestantism has its share of inherent dangers, such as solo scriptura…’. I think that’s what makes some of the TRs uncomfortable with you as well. I’m not criticizing, btw, just documenting my irrational fear of emotion. I want certainty & assurance (about other people’s mental states).

Slam dunk on that last sentence. Bingo. Presto. 10 points and the prize rabbit.

I think this is pretty close to it. In fact, I think this is a reflection of a greater cultural issue, something outside Christianity of any stripe: in general, while women are just as capable of thinking logically as men are, men’s logic has an aggression factor to it.

Again, in case it went unnoticed the first time I said it, I’m speaking in general: I think when a man gets into a verbal logical argument, he’s more likely than a woman to be on the attack — “Argument X shall defeat Improper Thought Y.”

And while I’m not intimately familiar with the TR blogosphere — this is one of the few religious blogs I read at all — the impression I get is that that sort of logical aggression is not only welcome there, it’s considered necessary. Calvinism in general strikes me as an emotion-negative sort of reading of the faith: “Feel uncomfortable with the idea of a God who doesn’t love everyone? Wuss.”

IMO, a contributing factor of the cute-pink-book tea party is the Mars-and-Venus bandwagon so much of Evangelicism has piled aboard. Of course men and women have their differences, but Eldrege, Eggerich, and others have exaggerated them far beyond what evidence supports.

We are first individuals–with a unique mix of male and female traits–before we ever begin to fit into their fairy-tale stereotypes of femininity and masculinity.

Thanks again for a great post. Good food for thought.