Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan, Andrew Tate, and dozens of others with smaller but still large audiences. Why are these alternative influencers attracting huge audiences of young men while traditional institutions and authorities like churches and schools struggle to get a hearing?
There is another reason why French would stress self-sacrifice as the only acceptable form of self-actualisation and that is because the very institutions which give him his high status - such as the New York Times - would remove it if he started advocating for men's rights or arguing that men, collectively or individually, should push to increase their power for their own sake. They hold a core value that men - especially White men - are already too powerful, and that reducing their status is THE key social priority. Men like French are allowed on the team only to the extent that they endorse that agenda.
Addressing Christians, in the church the overemphasis on sacrifice comes from a narrow reading of Ephesians 5:25 — “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her.” You will often see this presented as the sum of masculinity, and the ground of servant leadership. In the marital relationship, the man is supposed to be the great sacrificer to the needs of the woman.
But reading on and continuing to apply the text:
5:26 — “that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word” means that it’s his job to guide her into maturity by authoritatively teaching the truth. 1 Cor 14:35 brings this form of masculinity to the foreground explicitly in a text that stumbles many moderns. Maybe the most masculine thing a husband can do is to sit his wife down and read and teach the Bible. I’ll wager most Christian husbands don’t do that.
Further:
5:27 — “that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish.” The reason a husband teaches and matures his bride to to make her glorious, and if a church disobedient to Christ is not a glorious church, then a bride disobedient to her husband is not a glorious wife. Eph 5:22; Col 3:18. And while over the course of her life a wife won’t be able to avoid wrinkles, she should take care for her appearance. A husband is to help his wife be beautiful. It’s ok to ask her to take off a few pounds. The church should bring glory to Christ and a submissive and beautiful wife should bring glory to her husband.
The implications of 5:26-27 for marital relations are not often enough explored. As are the implications of 1 Cor 11. Don’t get overly distracted by the head coverings. Just look at Paul’s blunt reasoning in defense of hierarchy from the creation order. Women are equal to men in worth as co-image bearers; they are equal to men in importance because nothing happens without them; they are not equal to men in authority. They are made for men in a way that men are not made for women.
"Public respect is another matter. The major culture shaping institutions of society provide affirmation and status to people who perform favored actions, and ignore or even condemn actions they don’t like. This sort of public affirmation plays a huge role in shaping how people behave. If men, husbands, fathers are not shown public regard by society, it’s not realistic to expect that they will overcome that and collectively step up and do the things that French wants. If society wants men to behave honorably, then it must provide public honor to those who do so. At the individual level, men have to rise above bad incentives. But if we want to change behavior at scale, providing public honor is critical. Individual purpose is not a substitute for public respect."
It doesn't matter what people think and you can't make that your barometer in choice-making, as you note elsewhere. Do what you think is correct and you can rest in that choice.
French is a self serving traitor to the conservative movement. Siding with the lefty nyt and going against Trump and his supporters. He has no authority in any capacity and serves his true masters through his Harvard allegiance. He would soon see right leaning men sacrifice harder for tge acela corridor with a boot on their face forever. He can let the left leaning blue haired freaks cuck and beat down their men. All other men should ignore that twat.
What if Matt Walsh made a video on what it means to be a man? How cringe would it be?
There is another reason why French would stress self-sacrifice as the only acceptable form of self-actualisation and that is because the very institutions which give him his high status - such as the New York Times - would remove it if he started advocating for men's rights or arguing that men, collectively or individually, should push to increase their power for their own sake. They hold a core value that men - especially White men - are already too powerful, and that reducing their status is THE key social priority. Men like French are allowed on the team only to the extent that they endorse that agenda.
Good thoughts. Aaron.
Addressing Christians, in the church the overemphasis on sacrifice comes from a narrow reading of Ephesians 5:25 — “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her.” You will often see this presented as the sum of masculinity, and the ground of servant leadership. In the marital relationship, the man is supposed to be the great sacrificer to the needs of the woman.
But reading on and continuing to apply the text:
5:26 — “that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word” means that it’s his job to guide her into maturity by authoritatively teaching the truth. 1 Cor 14:35 brings this form of masculinity to the foreground explicitly in a text that stumbles many moderns. Maybe the most masculine thing a husband can do is to sit his wife down and read and teach the Bible. I’ll wager most Christian husbands don’t do that.
Further:
5:27 — “that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish.” The reason a husband teaches and matures his bride to to make her glorious, and if a church disobedient to Christ is not a glorious church, then a bride disobedient to her husband is not a glorious wife. Eph 5:22; Col 3:18. And while over the course of her life a wife won’t be able to avoid wrinkles, she should take care for her appearance. A husband is to help his wife be beautiful. It’s ok to ask her to take off a few pounds. The church should bring glory to Christ and a submissive and beautiful wife should bring glory to her husband.
The implications of 5:26-27 for marital relations are not often enough explored. As are the implications of 1 Cor 11. Don’t get overly distracted by the head coverings. Just look at Paul’s blunt reasoning in defense of hierarchy from the creation order. Women are equal to men in worth as co-image bearers; they are equal to men in importance because nothing happens without them; they are not equal to men in authority. They are made for men in a way that men are not made for women.
"Public respect is another matter. The major culture shaping institutions of society provide affirmation and status to people who perform favored actions, and ignore or even condemn actions they don’t like. This sort of public affirmation plays a huge role in shaping how people behave. If men, husbands, fathers are not shown public regard by society, it’s not realistic to expect that they will overcome that and collectively step up and do the things that French wants. If society wants men to behave honorably, then it must provide public honor to those who do so. At the individual level, men have to rise above bad incentives. But if we want to change behavior at scale, providing public honor is critical. Individual purpose is not a substitute for public respect."
It doesn't matter what people think and you can't make that your barometer in choice-making, as you note elsewhere. Do what you think is correct and you can rest in that choice.
French is a self serving traitor to the conservative movement. Siding with the lefty nyt and going against Trump and his supporters. He has no authority in any capacity and serves his true masters through his Harvard allegiance. He would soon see right leaning men sacrifice harder for tge acela corridor with a boot on their face forever. He can let the left leaning blue haired freaks cuck and beat down their men. All other men should ignore that twat.