In Response – Not the Point

I recently received a comment on one of my posts, “That Blue One’s the Boy One”.  The commentor, as you can read below in red, misses the point.

The color examples don’t make any sense. Attributing color to gender is arbitrary. It’s not an instinct. It’s learned. Before the 20th century, most babies were dressed in white because it could withstand hot washes. In the 1920’s in the US, pink was for boys and blue was for girls. Pink was considered a watered down shade of red, think blood and blue was considered dainty because it was the color of the sky and water. The French dressed girls in pink and the Germans dressed boys in pink. It’s meaningless. Think dresses are for girls?  Not in this country. Most boys wore dresses in the late 1800’s because fabric was scarce and they grew out of pants too quickly. As for your “men and women are different” arguments, the scientific research has shown that there are more within-group differences than between-group differences for men and women aside from a few physiological differences. The reason that there is a difference is because society has created different rules for different genders. From looking around your website, I guarantee what I am writing won’t make a difference and you probably won’t give it a second thought, but it goes against everything that we know about our society. This site seems to be a giant amalgamation of stereotypical and baseless opinions. It is well-designed though and the layout is phenomenal. I hope that some healthier examples of masculinity, fatherhood and mentoring make their way to your site in the future.

Allow me to respond to Jerrod.  First off, thanks for the comment.  Secondly, you’re missing the point in the first half of your comment.  It wasn’t about the color, which I clearly stated in my original post.  You bring up some other points that need clarification.

1. The “men and women argument” isn’t my argument.  I’m merely stating what others (namely, John Paul the Great; one of the greatest philosophers and peacemakers in human history) have already worked out extensively.  To say that there are “more within-group differences than between-group differences” is quite simply, false.  Your scientific research is flawed.  If you’d like to email me personally, I’m happy to take a look at what you are using as your source(s).
2. What you wrote is very important to me.  What you wrote is, in part, why I have this website.  I’m interested in bringing to light the truths of manhood so that our society can return to a properly functioning society.  As of now, in our post-modern society, we do not function properly as a whole.  This is mainly because males fail to live up to TrueManhood.  I’m working to change that.  You say that my website “goes against everything we know about our society.”  You’re correct, I’m working to fight the culture we live in.  Sin rules our world, and in order for society to thrive, we must fight our tendency toward sin.  To say “what we know about our society” implies that what our society does/thinks is correct.  What we think is correct, is not.  Our society needs conversion of heart to the source of life – Jesus Christ.
3. As for the site being a “giant amalgamation of stereotypes and baseless opinions”, I disagree.  My articles are based in Catholic truth, the fullness of truth.  That’s a giant topic, so I don’t guess we can get into it here.  I’m fighting the stereotypes of what is expected of males in our society – just read any of the articles I write about commercials we see.  I’m guessing you probably haven’t really read many of my articles, or maybe that you don’t understand them.  My apologies.  And yes, while my articles are opinion, they are not baseless.  My opinions are in line with the Church (many bishops and priests support my website) and are rooted in the understanding of virtue as a way of life.  If you’re interested in reading more about virtue, type VIRTUE in the search box and get to reading – there’s lots there.  Specifically, you can check out “TrueManhood’s Guide to Virtue”.
4. I appreciate the comments about the layout and design.  I work hard to keep the sight going.  (And, I’m always working on new stuff, and want more comments of what everyone is hoping for!)
5. Finally Jerrod, from your last sentence, I’d like to know what you think is a “healthier example of masculinity, fatherhood and mentoring…”  Thanks.

Man up!

In Response – Great Questions

I recently received a comment with some great questions about my last post “Relationships Relationships“.  I would like to respond here and also encourage everyone to post comments so we can increase the communication on the site!  Keep asking great questions!  (At the bottom of every post is the comment box, called “SPEAK YOUR MIND”, like the box you see to the left.)

THE COMMENT: Dave – how do you effectively date with a purpose (towards marriage discernment) without putting undue pressure/stress on the relationship? I’ve been in a spot before where the constant evaluation of the question of “Is she the one?” gets in the way of enjoying a simple ice cream cone, kind of like being scrupulous and dwelling on it too much. It is hard to describe the feeling, but at some points it can feel like you’re viewing the other person as a means to an end, rather an end in and of themselves, and as Kant would say “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means to an end.” I know Kant wasn’t a church father but I think there’s a lot of value in that quote. In other words – sometimes I want to enjoy the company of my girlfriend as a fellow human being, enjoying either an ice cream cone or a game of poker, without stressing too much about the call to marriage.

Also – should there not be at least a certain respect/reason for the duration between engagement and marriage, in the sense of acknowledging the accepted commitment (of engagement) while also admitting the need to further understand the churches teachings on marriage (which perhaps wasn’t rigorously necessary while dating) such as NFP, the vocation/sacrament of marriage, etc? I imagine the wait can be very frustrating but I think it also has value.

Also, I mostly agree with you on arguments, but I do think you can still have disagreements on politics etc., and that’s ok and can make for fruitful discussion still. Also, hard to explain, but I think an argument can be okay now and then – if only in the sense that while no one directly wants to pursue argument/conflict, neither side wants to be a pushover either, always trying to avoid confrontation. It’s tricky though.

MY RESPONSE: in response to the first part of the comment about “undue pressure on the relationship”, I recommend getting to know the person you are thinking about dating before you start dating them.  This doesn’t always work, but in most cases I think it is what’s best.  For instance, if you are trying to figure out what sort of girl she is, observe her in public, with her friends and with strangers.  [A great tool for knowing how she treats others is to go out to eat and witness her interaction with the server.]  You can do this by spending time together in groups, at events, parties, whether with her friends, your friends or both.  It takes pressure off at the beginning of the friendship, instead of putting pressure on during the middle of one.  During this time of observation, you are being yourself, open and honest and living your life – hopefully she is too.  DO NOT EMOTIONALLY DATE THIS GIRL!!!  If you want to take her out, then Man up! and ask her out.  By learning who she is before you ask her out, you can make a realistic determination whether or not she is the type of woman you can see yourself in a relationship with.  By jumping into a relationship without knowing her, you are taking a chance later in the relationship.  This is why you “date with a purpose”, which actually starts LONG BEFORE you ever start dating someone.  Your public, private, spiritual and emotional life should be in order before you invite someone into it, and vice versa.  There’s a reality about dating with a purpose, that this relationship is going to end… it may end in break up, or it may end in marriage!  (funny, huh?!)    This doesn’t mean that you can’t go out and have fun, but I caution you against being in a relationship with someone simply because they are fun, or you have fun with them.  Certainly, fun/happiness/joy is a huge part of a relationship, but this girl isn’t your drinking buddy or the guys you go shoot hoops with.  She may very well be the mother of your children… that requires a lot of thought and virtue on your part!

In response to the second part of the comment about “engagement”, yes, you are correct to say that the time during engagement can be purposeful and valuable.  However, engagement is NOT a time to discern!  The discernment happens prior to the asking and accepting.  An understanding of the Sacrament and of the married life is important to have, preferably prior to the relationship but if not, then prior to engagement.  It’s not a “shot in the dark”, this is a for-sure decision… you’d better be certain about what’s happening.  So, for some couples, they’re going to need a full year, which most diocese/churches require for marriage prep.  Some other couples simply do not need that time.  I believe that it comes down to the couple’s formation and understanding of what they are about to embark on.  For my wife and I, we were ready and understood fully what we were embarking on.  Our engagement was about seven months long .  I know other couples that needed longer than 12 months.  As for NFP preparation, a woman can learn her cycle by charting (or whichever method the couple is going to utilize) after about three months.  Obviously, not every woman is going to have an experience like this.  I recommend that young women who are dating with a purpose start charting before engagement.  This doesn’t only tell them their fertile/unfertile days, it explains a lot about the female psyche, behavior, attitude and so on.  Again, I recommend that each couple decide with their marriage prep facilitators/priest where they are and how long they should be engaged.  Sometimes, the decision is made for you, depending on certain outside factors (deployments, graduations, moving, leases, family issues, jobs, etc.)

And in response to the third part of the comment about “disagreements and arguments”, I need to clarify what I mean by disagreements and arguments.  I do not mean differing in viewpoint, opinion or the like.  What I mean is when a couple is angry, frustrated, upset, etc. and they don’t care to look at the other point of view or to put the other person’s needs first.  Again, selfishness takes over in this case.  Yes, a couple is welcome to have differing opinions on things, and that can be healthy.  I think couples that have been together for at least a little while can determine the difference here and know what’s what.  Once a person understand love more fully (the greatest virtue, by the way!) they begin to look at life, their goals, their spouse, their kids, in a whole new light!

Kant was quoted earlier, but I want to quote John Paul II, “Love is the unification of persons.” (Love and Responsibility). If a man is unified with his spouse, his love will win out over disagreements and arguments.  We should all strive for this.

Thanks for your time on this one today!

Man up!