Addendum to the Ladies
A couple days ago, Candice Watters provided some excellent pointers about the ladies at Boundless. I’ve blogged about that over here, and also have opined about it over there.
Now, what I’d like to do is provide some clarification. I have no disagreements with what Candice has written. In fact, I am providing more of an addendum.
In the Boundless thread, much of the discussion devolved into a foodfight over women working outside the home and pursuing careers. This revolved around the following comment that Candice made in her blog:
There is more than one interpretation of this passage, but what’s common in them is the idea that the woman will desire to be superior to the man. Feminist activists have long fought for power for women. And in many sectors, women have gotten even more than they set out to obtain. They have the power. They have the degrees. They’re outperforming, outearning and outlearning their male counterparts. There is an increasing number of couples where the woman is, by worldly standards, better than her man. Ironically, she’s not so happy about it. Turns out it’s no fun to be married to a man who’s less ambitious, less accomplished, less motivated, less interested and in any other way less.
Some respondents have taken Candice’s words to imply that they should dumb themselves down in order to make themselves more marriageable. They missed the point, as they tend to forget that Candice is herself the founder of Boundless, and has a master’s degree. (Okay, I’m done defending Candice now. Hopefully, Farmer Tom will give me back my man card.)
At the same time, the ladies need to take a step back and revisit some issues. I have a news flash here: men and women are different. The things that attract men are not the same things that attract women.
In my last post, I noted that women are attracted to power. This is true, even in many cases where the power is shady and the people involved are unscrupulous. Henry Kissinger was on the money: “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.” Even if that power is malevolent. I’ve seen women fall for drug dealers, corrupt politicians (that would be most of them), businessmen known to be corrupt, and–yes–even abusive and controlling men.
Aside from the problem of falling for those types of men, here’s where I think women need to beware: the things that attract women are not the same things that attract men.
Sadly, feminism has failed to relay that message to women. So here’s what has happened:
(1) Women are attracted to power.
(2) Feminism encourages women to excel and acquire power.
(3) Women who follow suit are now expecting men to be attracted to that power in the same way the women are.
(4) The men don’t find it attractive.
(5) The women decide that the men are just scared of “successful” women.
Ladies, listen up, and listen good:
A woman who advertises her ability to succeed in “the man’s world” is as attractive to a man as an obese feminist with a butch haircut.
We’re not “intimidated” by success; it’s just that–when you sell yourself in terms of it–we find that as attractive as you would an unkempt, obese man who lives with his parents and can’t hold a job.
I know a fine Christian gal who is a dermatologist (KM). Cubbie and I have known her for years. In terms of looks, she’s got ‘em and then some. In terms of education, she’s got an undergrad degree in engineering. While she has a career, she also has her priorities in order. Even as she had designs on becoming a physician, she still married early, and has scaled back her medical work in favor of homeschooling the kids.
I know another Christian gal (JD) who is single. In terms of looks, she’s as attractive as KM, takes great care of herself, and is debt-free and very resourceful. Sounds like a great catch, right?
Trouble is, she’s a liberal, has made her way up the career ladder at the expense of others, has undermined good people in her company, and defines herself in terms of her worldly success. Whereas KM is otherwise unassuming, JD always has to be in charge, always has to look better than anyone else, and can’t tolerate when others are recognized for success.
That is why JD is still single. For all her attractive qualities, no Christian man in his right mind would want to live under the same roof with JD.
Does that mean that men eschew competition? Of course not. Men LOVE competition. Don’t believe me? Drop in at any gun range in America.
I sometimes get together with my church friends and go shooting. If you don’t think we compete, you’d be mistaken. We have one guy who shoots the lights out with a shotgun. We have another guy who can drive a tack from a half-mile out with his Remington 700. I am the tops with my pistol the group.
We compete, and we LOVE competing. But when we’re done competing, we’ll sit down and knock back a beer or two and talk everything from sports to theology.
But here’s the thing: while we enjoy competing against each other on the gun range–and at work with our co-workers–we don’t want our home life to be like our work life.
This is because, when we come home, we want a woman who is ON OUR TEAM, AND ON OUR SIDE, AND IS NOT SEEKING TO OUTDO US OR UNDERMINE US AT HOME.
I’m not saying that the career is a bad thing; OTOH you need to be the kind of person who thinks in terms of using your excellence to help build a godly home life that serves as a refuge from the world.
At the end of the day, a Christian man wants his home life to be a portrait of things to come, not a reflection of the cutthroat environment that characterizes the world in which we live.