Not Coming to a School Near You

     From a children's encyclopedia (first printing, 1914), on a man whom the writer justly calls our most popular President, Teddy Roosevelt:

     "While at college he taught a Sunday School class.  One day one of his students came to class with a black eye.  He owned up that he had got it in a fight and on a Sunday at that.  He confessed to his teacher that during the morning service a boy, sitting next to his sister, had pricked her all through the hour, so after church he waited outside and they had a good 'stand-up fight,' and he 'punched him good,' although he got a black eye in exchange.  'You did exactly right,' said his teacher and gave the lad a dollar.  To the class it was ideal justice, but when the church authorities heard of it they were scandalized.  Young Roosevelt was dismissed and took himself and his ideals to another Sunday School.
     "Many years later he gave this bit of advice to his Boy Scout friends: 'What we have a right to expect of the American boy is that he shall turn out to be a good American man.  Now, the chances are strong that he won't turn out to be much of a man unless he is a good deal of a boy.  He must not be a coward or a weakling, a bully, a shirk, or a prig.  He must work hard and play hard.  He must be clean-minded and clean-lived, and able to hold his own under all circumstances and against all comers.  It is only on these conditions that he will grow into the kind of a man of whom America can be really proud.  In life, as in a football game, the principle is: Hit the line hard; don't foul and don't shirk, but hit the line hard.'"

     It's impossible to imagine these words written for a children's encyclopedia now.  That's not only because of what is said, but also how it is said.  The style is plain and direct, with a dash of the colloquial in just the right spots.  But it is also subtle and intelligent, leaving many things unsaid -- the writer doesn't need to moralize about the first anecdote, but leaves the reader with a genial wink.  I doubt whether one child in ten nowadays would understand that there's meant to be a connection between the two anecdotes, and that what Teddy says to the Boy Scouts codifies in a general rule what the lad at Sunday School exemplified in a particular and upstanding way.  And a dollar was a lot of money in those days, too.

     I see that even then, though, you could get in a little trouble with the churchly for encouraging an honest fight.  It is as if Jesus commanded us not to turn our own cheeks, but to turn everybody else's, so that when your sister is pestered relentlessly all through the Sunday service, you say to her, bravely and nobly, "It's not a big deal, is it?  Forgive him," when you can with greater effectiveness and real Christian charity deck the lout and ask her to forgive him afterwards.

     The thing about Teddy's speech to the Boy Scouts that fascinates me, though, is not that Teddy would say such a thing (he was forever saying such things), nor that the writer of the encyclopedia article would see fit to report it for the edification of his young readers, especially the boys.  After all, in those days there was a veritable cascade of reading material for boys, about heroes and explorers and inventors.  It's that the boys would understand what he was talking about -- and would cheer him, too; I doubt they sat in incomprehending or sullen silence as he spoke to them so.  When he said "clean-minded," they had at least a vague notion of what that meant.  He said that they should not be cowards, shirkers, prigs, bullies, and weaklings, and they knew what he was getting at there, too.  In other words, it's remarkable to me not just that there was somebody named Teddy Roosevelt who would say such things to boys, but that there were boys who would accept such words from somebody named Teddy Roosevelt.

     None of the priggishness of political correctness here; no weakling celebration of having been a victim or a chump, or perhaps of claiming to have been a victim or a chump; no cowardly running away from the hard facts of life; no excuses to allow the shirker to slide through his youth devoting his mind and heart to nothing.  Yes, we now do discourage bullying, certainly -- but now too a black eye is far away from the worst that can happen to your child in school.  Not coincidental, that.  And we still have the bullies anyway.

Comments

[Matt]

Excellent post.

Could you provide us with details as to which Encyclopedia this was from?

Keep writing and posting please!

Matt

[David Gray]

"The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause, who if he wins knows the triumph of high achievement; but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly, so his place will never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

"I despise a man who surrenders his conscience to a multitude as much as I do one who surrenders it to one man."

"Do not hit at all if it can be avoided, but never hit softly."

"The man who loves other countries as much as his own stands on a level with the man who loves other women as much as his own wife."

Courtesy of Theodore Roosevelt

[David Gray]

A conversation with the German ambassador prior to our entry into WWI:

Ambassador: America will never enter the war against Germany.

Roosevelt: Why is that?

Ambassador: Because there are a million Germans in America who would rise up to defend the Fatherland.

Roosevelt: That is all right, we have a million and one lampposts from which to hang them.

[GL]

Tony,

You are a most generous man to share your eloquence with the rest of us. As always, thanks for another excellent post.

David,

"Do not hit at all if it can be avoided, but never hit softly."

A lesson with much current application. If only those who need to hear it most were listening.

[Postman]

Yesterday, while waiting for my wife at the mall, I chanced upon a scuffle played out on the asphalt, under the facade of Barnes and Nobles.

But this was no honorable duel, rewarded by the better Roosevelt. This scuffle was a tête-à-tête between mall security (an oxymoron if there ever was one) and two shirtless pubescents, stomping on their skateboards.

The partners couldn't believe they were being asked, politely, to curtail their thrill quest (and, perhaps, prurient peacock dance). They were even more offended that they were required to amend their shirtless attire, by -- I suppose -- shirtting on themselves.

Up to this point, Teddy might not have found much to disavow. Skateboarding is distantly related to sport, in the sense that the Huns and Greeks both could be described as societies. And TR may not have found shirtlessness offensive. He probably swam naked, but there were no women around the pool. Waist-up nakedness was still naked when the nicer, softer gender were about -- and there were some perambulators of this sort in the parking lot.

No, where the Big Stick would have bristled was at the moment the boys engaged in that peculiar modernist habit of "hostile wailing." They actually wept -- hot salt water streaking dirt tracks down their pockmarked, jejeune-bristled cheeks. They stuttered, inarticulate, their grievances at being charged to cease and clothe.

At the same time, oddly, they grimaced in rage, clenching fists, planning even at the moment to wage revenge, that night, when it was safe, of course. After all, the clenched fists and the rhetoric were impotent, unfortunately unlike the more biological appurtenances that had seen too much service.

But tonight was different: a little time jumping the curbs, certainly, then to work on scattering trash from the dumpsters, slashing a few tires, breaking a little glass. "We'll show them who rules the night."

All under the facade of Barnes and Nobles, where the biographies of TR are for sale, but not his stories of Sunday School, or the Boy Scouts.

[Joe Long]

I discussed this anecdote with my wife Sunday; you see, I begin teaching a Sunday School class in September and as T.R. has always been one of my heroes, it will be wonderful to lose the same position he lost, for a similar reason!

Among T.R.'s many overlooked accomplishments, he was largely responsible for the importation and popularization of the Japanese martial arts in this country - I got my M.A. thesis out of that, actually: "The Gentle Art and the Strenuous Life".

T.R. was Dutch Reformed, and his picture and Stonewall Jackson's are going up on my Presbyterian classroom wall. (I'm not actually trying to lose this assignment, but I do intend to find our quickly whether doing it right will be tolerated or not.)

[Judy Warner]

I just came across a book from England, The Dangerous Book for Boys. I don't know what the danger is, unless it be the danger of prescribing anything for boys instead of generic children, but it is full of wonderful old-fashioned things like how to make the perfect paper airplane, the knots you need to know how to tie, how to make a bow and arrows, and the seven wonders of the ancient world -- practical knowledge and knowledge of the world. I will give it to my grandson in the hope that it will pry him away from his gameboy and his nintendo for a brief moment.

[David Gray]

>I just came across a book from England, The Dangerous Book for Boys.

Al Mohler was just writing about that book...

[Bobby Winters]

Judy,
That looks great. Maybe one day I will have some grandson's I can use it with. In the mean time, I am very happy with my girls.

In my day, those things were just a part of growing up. We made a weapon for which there is no politically correct name our of the fork of a tree and cut up inner tube. We made tin can cannons and blew up potatoes with fire crackers. We caught crawdads with bacon and string. Life was good.

[Judy Warner]

Here's part of an interview with one of the authors, from Amazon:

Amazon.com: It's difficult to describe what a phenomenon The Dangerous Book for Boys was in the UK last year. When I would check the bestseller list on our sister site, Amazon.co.uk, there would be, along with your book, which spent much of the year at the top of the list, a half-dozen apparent knockoff books of similar boy knowledge. Clearly, you tapped into something big. What do you think it was?

Iggulden: In a word, fathers. I am one myself and I think we've become aware that the whole "health and safety" overprotective culture isn't doing our sons any favors. Boys need to learn about risk. They need to fall off things occasionally, or--and this is the important bit--they'll take worse risks on their own. If we do away with challenging playgrounds and cancel school trips for fear of being sued, we don't end up with safer boys--we end up with them walking on train tracks. In the long run, it's not safe at all to keep our boys in the house with a Playstation. It's not good for their health or their safety.

You only have to push a boy on a swing to see how much enjoys the thrill of danger. It's hard-wired. Remove any opportunity to test his courage and they'll find ways to test themselves that will be seriously dangerous for everyone around them. I think of it like playing the lottery--someone has to say "Look, you won't win--and your children won't be hurt. Relax. It won't be you."

I think that's the core of the book's success. It isn't just a collection of things to do. The heroic stories alone are something we haven't had for too long. It isn't about climbing Everest, but it is an attitude, a philosophy for fathers and sons. Our institutions are too wrapped up in terror over being sued--so we have to do things with them ourselves. This book isn't a bad place to start.

As for knockoff books--great. They'll give my son something to read that doesn't involve him learning a dull moral lesson of some kind--just enjoying an adventure or learning skills and crafts so that he has a feeling of competence and confidence--just as we have.

[Joe Long]

"Backyard Ballistics" is another dangerous book for boys...lots of great stuff there. Um...best to be pretty sure they're the sort of healthy boys Roosevelt was talking to, actually, before you let 'em get hold of it.

[Tim]

Dr. Esolen:

I have noticed that over the last few months (perhaps it is a long time interest?) you have posted several comments about boys and "manliness." I appreciate all of these very much, and think we are necessarily at a point of reclaiming what it means to be a man, in a more traditional sense. The wild popularity of the "The Dangerous Book for Boys" is I think a sign of a deep hunger.

You write wonderfully about these things. Would you consider writing a book to look at these issues for a broader audience? James Bowman at the EPPC (http://www.eppc.org/publications/bookID.60/book_detail.asp) has written a book entitled "Honor" that is written I think with a similar concern. Anyway, here's hoping. Thanks.

[GL]

Judy,

Thanks for the reference to The Dangerous Book for Boys. I had never heard of it, but as a father of a soon-to-be six-year-old, I am definitely planning on buying it. The video brought back some memories. If viewed by a feminizer, it may induce a heart attack or stroke. One can hope.

(Did that sound like Ann Coulter? ;-) -- I still don't like her even if I sometimes act like her.)

[Christopher Hathaway]

GL, it is remarkable how this post reflects upon the one dealing with Coulter. If she were a man would she get half as much scorn as she does? She certainly "hits the line hard". So did Thatcher, the Iron Lady, when most of her male counterparts were weak in the knees.

[GL]

I should have said "soon-to-be six-year-old boy."

[Michael]

One of the commenters on Amazon.com regarding The Dangerous Book for Boys noted this from Chesterton:

A child's instinct is almost perfect in the matter of fighting; a child always stands for the good militarism as against the bad. The child's hero is always the man or boy who defends himself suddenly and splendidly against aggression. The child's hero is never the man or boy who attempts by his mere personal force to extend his mere personal influence. In all boys' books, in all boys' conversation, the hero is one person and the bully the other. That combination of the hero and bully in one, which people now call the Strong Man or the Superman, would be simply unintelligible to any schoolboy....

But really to talk of this small human creature, who never picks up an umbrella without trying to use it as a sword, who will hardly read a book in which there is no fighting, who out of the Bible itself generally remembers the "bluggy" [bloody] parts, who never walks down the garden without imagining himself to be stuck all over with swords and daggers--to take this human creature and talk about the wickedness of teaching him to be military, seems rather a wild piece of humour. He has already not only the tradition of fighting, but a far manlier and more genial tradition of fighting than our own. No; I am not in favour of the child being taught militarism. I am in favour of the child teaching it.

Amen.

[Bob Gardner]

I was going to bring up the 'maleness,' of Ann on that thread, but couldn't think of an inoffensive way to suggest that part of the problem maybe that it is coming from a lady. As I wasn't sure of the thesis I didn't say any, but I couldn’t help thinking if Chesterton was against female suffrage because he felt it beneath the dignity of the fairer sex, then what would he have thought about political commentary the likes of which Ann is accustom to?

[Gordon L Belyea]

Re: "Not coming..."

What's Sunday School? Even the context would be mysterious for most young people nowadays. I just last evening attended the Spring Celebration presentation at my daughters' school. The various acts were interspersed with sermonettes about how much garbage we were collectively making (I could make a snide remark here regarding the pageant's content itself, but forbear). The whole evening concluded with the song, "We've got the whole world in our hands", to the tune familiar to us from Sunday School. Had the producers of the event been acquainted with that particular institution, as the subject Encyclopedia's readers would have been, they would have realised that to replace God with men as those responsible for the world (one which, according to the song, didn't appear to include "you and me, brother," but only assorted flora and fauna) is idolatry. I'm thankful my daughters seemed to realise as much, when my wife and I discussed it with them before bed.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

"GL, it is remarkable how this post reflects upon the one dealing with Coulter. If she were a man would she get half as much scorn as she does? She certainly "hits the line hard". So did Thatcher, the Iron Lady, when most of her male counterparts were weak in the knees." - Christopher Hathaway.

In addition to Thatcher, I was also thinking of Golda Meir, Deborah in the Bible, and Joan of Arc. All of those women were courageous and endured criticism. Same as Ann Coulter.

[of course the Liberals could name their own courageous "heroines" which would make me blanch, but hey, can't win 'em all.]

[Bob Gardner]

Just to clarify that isn't my problem with Ann, but I wonder if some of her harsher critics (not those here) think it unseemly.

[GL]

I did not mean to reopen the Coulter Conflict on this thread. See my replies on Coulter on Falwell.

[Joe Long]

Let's leave Ann be. Could be that, like Deborah, she stands partly as a reproach to men who fail to relish righteous combat. It's perhaps significant that a discussion of the cultivation of masculine virtues should quickly veer off in that direction, though...like a "Cheers" episode I vaguely remember, where a couple of the guys are looking for inspiration for masculinity and cite "Thelma and Louise".

[Michael]

>>The whole evening concluded with the song, "We've got the whole world in our hands", to the tune familiar to us from Sunday School. Had the producers of the event been acquainted with that particular institution, as the subject Encyclopedia's readers would have been, they would have realised that to replace God with men as those responsible for the world (one which, according to the song, didn't appear to include "you and me, brother," but only assorted flora and fauna) is idolatry. I'm thankful my daughters seemed to realise as much, when my wife and I discussed it with them before bed.<<

Whatever happened to Raffi? I learned that song from him, along with "Baby Beluga," that made abundantly clear that "Heaven's above." Return, Children's Troubador!

[cnb]

A slightly longer version of the quote from Chesterton re: boys and "militarism" is posted on The Hebdomadal Chesterton blog. I post one long-ish excerpt from his writings each week. If you like Chesterton, feel free to stop by once in a while.

[Ethan Cordray]

By all means, let's keep Ann to her own thread.

[Judy Warner]

Well, I brought this thread onto the Ann thread, so I suppose some are returning the compliment.

[Ethan Cordray]

As much as I desire to raise daughters (after, Lord willing, I find a wife), I would relish the opportunity to teach sons how to swordfight and build forts.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

If we're going to discuss strong, polarizing leaders who had hard-hitting things to say and who held staunch convictions, why not bring up Ann Coulter, Teddy Roosevelt, and our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ?

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

Ethan, may you marry someone like Ann Coulter. Someone with her own mind, has the courage of her convictions, and is the epitome of a Proverbs 31 woman. (you like the last part, eh? ;-)

Then she can teach your sons how to swordfight and build forts.

[Michael]

>>As much as I desire to raise daughters (after, Lord willing, I find a wife), I would relish the opportunity to teach sons how to swordfight and build forts.<<

I am of the same persuasion: may the Lord bless me how he sees fit, but from my human perspective, how I would love girls. I'm a blackbelt in TaeKwonDo and spent two years learning kendo and six months in fencing, so I would absolutely relish the chance to teach a son the fun stuff.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

"I'm a blackbelt in TaeKwonDo and spent two years learning kendo and six months in fencing,..." - Michael

Do you know firearms too?

Love being on your side in your debates with Stuart, Coco, et al. ;-)

[Michael]

>>Do you know firearms too?

Love being on your side in your debates with Stuart, Coco, et al. ;-)<<

I doubt I know firearms as well as Stuart, but I know how to operate them, and can do so rather proficiently. I took up a leadership position in my home church's youth group, and upon noticing the lack of manly values in the culture at large, and the loss of participation after Confirmation (we're Lutheran), it was decided that it was time to launch a sort of Christian finishing school that taught strong values so our boys may become men and that our girls may become women. Accordingly, the boys follow a military model and frequent team-buidling exercises, including war games.

[Joe Long]

My oldest two recently underwent their first aikido rank test, at ten and eight (son and daughter). I want my daughter to be able to handle herself as well, and she's making a fine start - good little marksman, as well, I'm happy to say.

When the time comes - quite nice "singlesticks" can be made from dowels with insular foam tubes to fit; handguards cut from a cheap camping mattress give the basket-hilt effect, if you want that. I let my son's peers clobber one another in the yard with cut-up sections of "pool noodles"; they have not yet successfully damaged one another, and only a few of their parents are horrified.

[Ethan Cordray]

My parents didn't teach us shooting -- a flaw I intend to rectify with all my progeny, sons and daughters.

Instead of imaginary guns my brother and I used to hunt imaginary wolves using non-imaginary rocks. I've got the scalp scar to prove it!

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

"... a sort of Christian finishing school that taught strong values so our boys may become men and that our girls may become women." - Michael

This is heresy according to secular liberals! Gender neutralization and egalitarianism is the mantra of the cultured liberal elites!

But I heartily support you and your church. I believe God has a Divine Design for gender and role distinctions in the home and church, and the blurring of those roles has had negative consequences for society.

[Michael]

>>When the time comes - quite nice "singlesticks" can be made from dowels with insular foam tubes to fit; handguards cut from a cheap camping mattress give the basket-hilt effect, if you want that. I let my son's peers clobber one another in the yard with cut-up sections of "pool noodles"; they have not yet successfully damaged one another, and only a few of their parents are horrified.<<

My friends and I call these "boffing" sticks, and we made several of them during our junir high and high school careers out of 3/4-inch PVC tubes and insular pipe foam. By cutting the tubes and foam to whatever length we wanted, he had short swords, long swords, a full six-foot quarterstaff and everything in between. We were never seriously injured.

We also built a treefort (we are men, we do not build treehouses, we build forts) out of wood we stripped off of shipping pallets that were thrown out at The Boeing Co.'s surplus store not far from where we live. I suppose I lived the proper boy's childhood--baseball, scars, trees, the occasional fight.

But here is the wonderful thing about the proper childhood: I am still young, but I recognize now that I am blessed with incredible bonds of friendship and even brotherhood with my fellow young men whom I grew up with. Now we sit around fires and stare quietly into the flaming abyss, knowing full well that though we are individually strong, we are not alone.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

"I am blessed with incredible bonds of friendship and even brotherhood with my fellow young men whom I grew up with. Now we sit around fires and stare quietly into the flaming abyss, knowing full well that though we are individually strong, we are not alone."

That's beautiful. That comment would be well placed on the Teddy Roosevelt thread.

[Judy Warner]

Christian finishing school! I love it. We need lots and lots of those.

[Ethan Cordray]

>>Accordingly, the boys follow a military model and frequent team-buidling exercises, including war games.<<

Michael, I take it your youth group is sex-segregated, then?

Just about the only things I fondly remember from my youth group days were camping out, playing basketball, and playing paintball in the woods with slingshots. I was never the best at such things, being from early youth a wimpy intellectual type, but they were a lot more fun than sitting around listening to the leaders try to extract answers to religious questions from abunch of embarrassed teenaged boys.

I think once we finally got some girls in the group things went down hill...

[Michael]

>>Michael, I take it your youth group is sex-segregated, then?

Just about the only things I fondly remember from my youth group days were camping out, playing basketball, and playing paintball in the woods with slingshots. I was never the best at such things, being from early youth a wimpy intellectual type, but they were a lot more fun than sitting around listening to the leaders try to extract answers to religious questions from abunch of embarrassed teenaged boys.

I think once we finally got some girls in the group things went down hill...<<

Yes and no. We have distinct programs for boys (Band of Brothers/BOB) and girls (Charis, Greek for "grace") in high school, but they operate semi-autonomously from the general youth program. On Wednesday nights, the entire youth group is together for some program--worship, baseball games, what have you--and on Sunday mornings there is a group Bible study prior to splitting into boy/girl programs. We share retreats, of course, but on many retreats, we treat them as conferences, where students can select individual courses they'd like to take during the weekend, and sometimes those courses are restricted by gender, age or both.

It is the plan for next year to start opearting differently in how we approach youth group, segregating Sunday mornings by age and by sex into distinct small groups for grades 7, 8 and 10-12 (ninth graders are in class as Confirmands), bringing the high schoolers together as a large Bible study group one Sunday per month. By addressing needs according to age and sex, we can suffuse the Biblical curriculum with the values and challenges faced with distinct ages and peer groups.

The boy/girl high school programs offer certain qualities that are unique to the sexes and how they operate in the world. Our young men are encouraged and taught, with focus on the life of David, to live lives of 1) strength, 2) honor, 3) wisdom, 4) passion and 5) service and due to the military model are taught active submission to both a head (Christ and our "officers") and to each other as a team. During a nine-month school year, we spend about 5 weeks on each quality, it's definition, how it lived out, where we see it Biblically, etc. with assignments weekly to be completed at school, at home--reading books, Bible studies, etc.

For the young ladies, I confess to being mostly ignorant of their program, because, frankly, I don't want to know much about it. I understand the need for women to be taught 1) beauty (not just physical) and 2) independence--there are more than these two, but I haven't taken the time to find out what they are. They are a gaggle of teenage girls who spend one weekend a month doing sleepovers, living in community with each other and appreciating their roles as hostesses, even occasionally surprising everyone, including our young men's program, with offers of prepared food, general accompaniment, etc.

Once per year, there is a co-weekend of B.O.B. and Charis. It is in this setting that we hope to teach our men how to treat the fairer sex with respect, dignity, restraint and to help them be comfortable, because the relationship between the two isn't always about sex. Two years ago, it was the duty of the young men to escort and serve the ladies a dinner prepared by a gourmet executive chef who attends the church as if they were at a high-class restaurant, to pamper them and identify that they were beautiful and special.

[Ethan Cordray]

Good gravy, that's quite a program, Michael! During most of my years, we were half a dozen guys sitting around in a dad's basement. Our activies mostly consisted of pool, table tennis, basketball, and the occasional sledding and camping trip. We also got to shoot a potato cannon once...

[GL]

Michael,

That is very impressive. You have my admiration. How large a church do you attend? How many Jr. High/Sr. High age youth do you have?

[Tony Esolen]

Ah, you folks on this thread give me hope! I'm not alone, crying out in the wilderness -- there are at least fifty others in camel's hair too!

I just heard this morning about that Dangerous Book for Boys, on the Glenn Beck radio show. I'll bet that the book teaches more hard thinking and science than 12 years of school manage to do -- I mean for the general student, not for the kids in honors programs. My impression of "science" museums for children these days is that they all have followed this devolution:

science becomes biology
biology becomes ecology
ecology becomes hectoring (or cuddles)

Tim,

Thanks for those kind words. I've been trying to figure out what my next book will be about. The main idea at the moment: Ten Ways to Destroy a Child's Imagination. My wife says that that ought to be the subtitle, and that I need a snazzier quip for the title. I don't know. But I am trying to organize and list what would be the ten principle ways of ensuring that your child never has a profound encounter with the world about him, and instead follows along tamely with whatever fad the consumer anti-culture has cooked up.

Possibilities:

Keep him indoors.
Organize all his activities.
Make him lonely -- without solitude.
Geld and spay 'em all -- in the heart.
Tear down all heroes.
No history; current events.
Violate the Sabbath: make everything a matter of work.
Give him a low ceiling: no God.

Suggestions?

[Michael]

GL,

Our church has a regular Sunday attendance of around 900 with about 2000 communicants on the books. The youth group is, without question, our most thriving ministry, pulling in around 300 students over the course of a year. This number includes the friends of youth members, guests and "seekers," so the realistic number for our group at large is about 200. As you can understand, not all attend every week--sickness, family vacations and what not--but we have a fairly consistent crowd of 40 high schoolers and 25 middle schoolers on Wednesday nights. Last Wednesday (e.g. the 15), we had over 80 people in attendance at a baseball game--we actually had to call and order extra tickets.

Note that these are small numbers, as we have seen a dip in commitment from post-Confirmation students over the last two years. Due to our investment, we can project rather confidently that these numbers are going to climb over the next few years. God has blessed us with an incredibly strong (both in spirit and in bond) Confirmation group this year.

But the gender-specific programs are unquestionably our "bread and butter" as it were. At our last war games team-building exercise, we had 50 people there--just young men, not including les femmes in any way, shape or form, and at the end-of-the-year ceremony for the ladies' group, they recorded 40 in attendance. And these are all high schoolers, no middle/junior high students.

What does that tell me? It tells me that the church should drop the charade that there is no qualitative difference between the genders and start teaching our boys how to be men and our girls how to be women.

[Michael]

Professor Esolen,

May I recommend for a snazzier title Of Dolls and Tonka Trunks?

As to another ways to destroy a boy's imagination:

--Offer him secular sex-ed, leave no mystery to the beauty of the girl he has a crush on

[Truth Unites...and Divides]

"It tells me that the church should drop the charade that there is no qualitative difference between the genders and start teaching our boys how to be men and our girls how to be women."

You must definitely not be an ELCA Lutheran, but an LCMS Lutheran, right?

[GL]

Oh, Elijah, there are more than 50, there are undoubtedly thousands. Our pastor has been working with the men of our church to develop ideas to make men of our boys. As the father of three daughters (as well as three sons), he is greatly concerned about, shall we say, the manhood of the young men his oldest daughters have brought home. He is dedicated to our raising *men* in our church.

[Michael]

>>You must definitely not be an ELCA Lutheran, but an LCMS Lutheran, right?<<

That would be correct. The ELCA isn't even a Lutheran body, no matter what they call themselves. Christian individual members they may be, but the church as a whole is fast on the way to joining the Episcopagans.

That said, however, one of my best friends--nay, brothers--in whose backyard rests our aforementioned treefort, is ELCA, and yet another (with whom I went to preschool and reconnected with in junior high) is WELS. We have fantastic inter-Lutheran debates on ecclesiastical social theory. What wonderful brethren they are! It is like being on Mere Comments with people who get my vague cultural references.

[Michael]

To Professor Esolen and GL,

I could e-mail you our young men's group program manual (we distribute handbooks upon joining). Moreover, there are divers speakers of whom I possess recordings who speak to this very issue, that is raising boys into men. I should have mentioned BOB's creed:

I am a Christian first and last,
created in the image of Almighty God
saved by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ
I am submitted to God's Word
And all those the Lord has put in authority over me

I do not boast in my abilities
But rely solely on the power of God
My attitude is above reproach
My conduct is above criticism

My body is a temple of God
My sweat is an offering to my Maker*
I give my all all the time:
I do not give up
I do not give in
I do not give out**

I am confident beyond reason
because my confidence is in Christ
I am the Lord's warrior
Let the battle begin

*or "Master," which I prefer since the first section of the creed deals with God as creator, hre we can see God as sovereign ruler
**to be understood as a double-entendre. We do not "put out" either, as we respect the sexual body we are granted.

[Truth Unites...and Divides]

"The ELCA isn't even a Lutheran body, no matter what they call themselves."

You're freakin' hilarious! I love it. Best man at my wedding is ELCA, and I fully agree with you. Of course, he was UCC prior to that and well, he's just about as liberal a Christian as you can find except that he does believe in a literal, historical Resurrection.

[DGP]

...ten principle [sic] ways of ensuring that your child never has a profound encounter with the world about him... Suggestions?

It sounds like a worthy project. Other tools for child suppression:

It is important to be liked by everyone, or at least not to upset anyone.

For boys: You're special.
For girls: You're nobody special.

I imagine the notion that a boy should be kept safe might fall somewhere under "geld 'em," so you might not need to add that one.

[Bill R]

"The Dangerous Book for Boys"

I don't know that I needed it at that age. I had the two greatest books after the Bible: The Cub Scout and the Boy Scout Handbooks. I don't know what they're like today, but mine were magic carpets.

Tony, to kill a boy's spirit, I'd deprive him of all healthy fantasy: sailing the seven seas, climbing the highest peaks, blasting into outer space. The book that did that for me was Richard Halliburton's "The Complete Book of Marvels." Halliburton lived the life that all young boys dreamed of. He even died the romantic death: lost at sea, sailing a Chinese junk from the Orient to San Francisco.

[GL]

Tony,

Suggestion:

Don't give him opportunities to be around men while they are doing what men do.

This is a hard one to fix in our culture, so I would really like to see your thoughts. I was reared on a farm. I worked with my father everyday from the time I was in late grade school until shortly after I graduated from high school, when he was diagnosed with cancer. Until the industrial revolution, boys (after a certain age), learned to be men by working with their fathers and other men and by observing other men in the community. That's not possible anymore, at least to that extent, but what can we do to make the best of the situation?

[Nick]

My wife spent a brief stint as a Mormon and her fondest memories are the segregation of the sexes that occurred in her stake where each sex was taught values particular to it (I'm not sure if this is common across the board and she didn't stay long enough to find out herself). She claims this as one of the great reasons for their growth. I agree.

[Nick]

GL,

I'm not sure I agree. I grew up in a city and the oppurtunity to do the same was afforded by very traditional family get-to-gethers. The men would congregate in one room after dinner while the women finished up in the kitchen and chatted. The boys set on the floor and listened to their elders debate (whilst trying not to make too much noise). In addition to this I was instructed by my great-uncles in various gardening tasks and other chores around the house when my extended family watched me. The same can be done now, it just requires strong family ties.

[Zamir]

the breaking up of the close knit group let's the individual breathe more freely
but it's also responsible for much evil

our work environment is a big cause of this, sadly

[Michael]

>>GL,

I'm not sure I agree. I grew up in a city and the oppurtunity to do the same was afforded by very traditional family get-to-gethers. The men would congregate in one room after dinner while the women finished up in the kitchen and chatted. The boys set on the floor and listened to their elders debate (whilst trying not to make too much noise). In addition to this I was instructed by my great-uncles in various gardening tasks and other chores around the house when my extended family watched me. The same can be done now, it just requires strong family ties.<<

Amen, Nick! I'm a suburb boy myself, and there is no question that how I grew up was not out on a farm learning to bale hay. But that didn't stop friends and family from showing me that being a man and beeing a woman were different things.

[Michael]

>>the breaking up of the close knit group let's the individual breathe more freely<<

Bollocks. In a true group, especially one close knit, the individual finds his identity and tastes in the context of companionship. The group suppresses nothing; it strengthens everything, as it encourages the individual gifts a member can offer the group. One of the chief things to be learned from military camradarie: someone is an excellent marksman, another an excellent battlefield strategist, another a demolitions man. Together, the team improves the strenght of all, and in the context of the group, the individual breathes most wonderfully free of all.

[Truth Unites...and Divides]

"But that didn't stop friends and family from showing me that being a man and beeing a woman were different things."

I think latch-key children devoted to watching reruns of "Will and Grace" will learn that being a man and being a woman are two different things. ;-)

[Zamir]

close knit groups heighten social control and so social conformity
which are in direct opposition to diversity of behaviour (diversity is not necessarily bad you know, neither is conformity)

ask yourself: how could artists and creative scientists function in a society led as an army unit

don't misunderstand me, the army unit has it's function but not one of freedom of expression and behaviour

[Truth Unites...and Divides]

"My impression of "science" museums for children these days is that they all have followed this devolution:

science becomes biology
biology becomes ecology
ecology becomes hectoring (or cuddles)" - Tony Esolen

Devolution? Cute. These "science" musuems are oftentimes Manchurian Candidate brainwashing that (macro)evolution is a FACT. If you later disagree, then you experience heckling. If you agree with (macro)evolution, then you receive cuddles from the priests and priestesses of secular academia.

P.S. Rough, working definition of macro-evolution: In the beginning, a Big Bang. Then primordial soup. Primordial slime gave rise to one-cell, then multi-celled life forms. These cellular life forms became fish and other sea creatures. These sea creatures eventually became land animals and birds. Then land animals evolved into humans. And here we are today.

This is what they taught me when I went to junior high school through college. Ain't Darwinian evolution great? But I didn't buy it. Not enough faith I guess.

[Truth Unites...and Divides]

Missing some words. "These "science" musuems are oftentimes Manchurian Candidate brainwashing [gulags enforcing the mantra] that (macro)evolution is a FACT.

[Michael]

>>close knit groups heighten social control and so social conformity
which are in direct opposition to diversity of behaviour (diversity is not necessarily bad you know, neither is conformity)

ask yourself: how could artists and creative scientists function in a society led as an army unit<<

To the first: no, diversity is not necessarily bad. I am quite fond of the fact that I can turn on the TV and watch Japanese anime, British sitcoms and American dramas. I am also fond of my plurality of friendships.

As to your second point: a lot better than you seem to think. That's all I'm going to say.

[Tony Esolen]

Zamir,

I'm afraid history doesn't bear you out. Here are examples of stunning bursts of cultural creativity occurring not despite but because of the camaraderie AND discipline of male groups:

The artist studios, employing sometimes dozens of boys, youths, and men, in Renaissance Italy

The gymnasia of ancient Athens, the city that essentially invented drama, politics, philosophy, historiography, systematic geometry, et cetera (and yes, I do know that other things went on in those gymnasia)

The student-guilds of medieval Europe, that created the university

The acting troupes of Elizabethan England

All these groups were characterized by very hard work, discipline, clear chains of command --

Also I think it is too easy for us these days to identify creativity (what is that, anyway?) with individualism. Call it a lingering effect of the Romantic disease.

[Judy Warner]

>>>Ten Ways to Destroy a Child's Imagination. <<<

More ways:

Don't read to him but make sure he watches lots of television.

Get him every electronic game so his thumbs can get lots of exercise and he never has to think of what to play.

[Judy Warner]

Michael, I too would like to see that handbook.

[GL]

Michael,

I definitely would like a copy of the handbook. Click my initials below to email me.

I am a big fan of the LCMS publishing house, Concordia. I have purchased several titles from it, most recently the first three titles in its sex education collection. My seven-year-old daughter is starting to ask questions about where babies come from and we prefer answering those from an orthodox Christian perspective rather than her learning it the new fashion way. I also have purchased copies of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions and the new Lutheran Service Book from CPH. I can't praise highly enough the products and services of CPH.

If you practice the Daily Office, you should check out The Brotherhood Prayer Book and the accompanying audio resources available through the Lutheran Liturgical Prayer Brotherhood at http://www.llpb.us/.

[Michael]

GL,

The book isn't published by CPH. We prepared it in-house and print it ourselves and send it out for binding. It contains our creed, dissertations on what it means to be a man of God, including on the five qualities (strength, honor, wisdom, passion and service) as well as vision verses and an introduction to what we're about, plus program information for members--since you're not a member, the program info will mean nothing to you, but the concept and context should give you a bright, ready idea of what we do.

As for Concordia, all I can say is that I love the new LSB. When I'm at church on Sunday, I'll get a digital copy of the book and send it to you.

[GL]

Michael,

I would greatly appreciate a digital copy of the LSB. Thank you.

[Joe Long]

Michael, I'd like the handbook too!!!

Dr. Esolen, to destroy a boy in our current society, just sit back and wait. You needn't do anything special at all - this is one of those cases where evil will quickly triumph if good men do nothing.

[labrialumn]

Michael,
I think you understand why I can't tell you which Concordia. The reason starts with 'p' and ends with 'ticks'. Same college of education insists, and gets conformity, confessional agreement that gender is socially constructed, and we aren't talking about noun endings. Our colleges are heavily staffed by ELCA fifth-columnists. The Daystar-Elim-Seminex types only left the seminaries, not the collegs.

Please tell me about this finishing school idea of yours. I have much concern over the same thing, and have a few thoughts, but I think that they would benefit from what you have going.

I daresay Charis would do well to teach them the womanly arts rather than beauty, which this society is already obsessed over. But cooking? Sewing? Homemaking (including the theological theory behind it), gardening? Child-rearing? Also in service, for it seems to me that Christian women of today see marriage totally in terms of self. What can they get out of it, will the guy give them all they want, will they be as gods to their husbands. Not service, not working together, equally yoked to serve the LORD in their callings. (and in a yoke, there is always a lead, as people used to know back before Henry Ford)

A well-matched team, who can find?

Tony, don't let him run, don't let him play with toy guns, make him tear down all of his projects before he is good and done with them. Cut him off from the elderly and their stories.

Michael, you can add to the BOB code, the motto of the Rangers: "We live for the One, we die for the One" and from the Bible "in life, and in death, we are His"

Boys -do- need socializing with the fair sex, though. Isoaltion from the fair sex is not a healthy thing. Boys turn into Lord of the Flies characters, and become nervous around women, which then can lead to the drop in fertility in another thread. IE Geeks don't get girls.
Boys need to understand, as J.R.R. Tolkien wrote one of his sons, that women are not china dolls to be put upon pedestals, but fellow survivors in a shipwreck.

[James A. Altena]

"GL, it is remarkable how this post reflects upon the one dealing with Coulter. If she were a man would she get half as much scorn as she does?"

I haven't been back to the Ann Couler thread yet; don't know if & when I'll find time to do so; and don't wish to re-open that debate here. But, for the record, I would say much the same of e.g. Rush Limbaugh as I did of Ann Coulter. My position on that subject is a matter of principle, not sex.

[Michael]

>>I daresay Charis would do well to teach them the womanly arts rather than beauty, which this society is already obsessed over. But cooking? Sewing? Homemaking (including the theological theory behind it), gardening? Child-rearing? Also in service, for it seems to me that Christian women of today see marriage totally in terms of self. What can they get out of it, will the guy give them all they want, will they be as gods to their husbands. Not service, not working together, equally yoked to serve the LORD in their callings. (and in a yoke, there is always a lead, as people used to know back before Henry Ford)<<

What I said was those were two qualities, the rest of which I did not know--though I could find out if I wanted to. I'm not involved with Charis. It is supervised by our (male) youth pastor, an ordained minister, and staffed and run by women. (Naturally--I would no sooner have 25-year-old men teach girls how to be women than I would have 12-year-old girls teach boys how to be men.)

More importantly, I also said that the beauty was "not just physical," and it is a mistake, one perpetuated in our society, to mistake a useful adjective for something so narrow and unuseful as physicality. Now it is right that we should teach girls, in some way, to carry their physical bodies with respect and proper modesty and expectations, just as we should with men. However, beauty is much more than that--it is the grace of spirit, the compassion, the, to be trited, "inner" beauty just so much as important, and even moreso. It was considered substituting words for this: "grace" was brought up, but beauty is a broader word than grace, and in itself, grace does not encompass all that we feel women are called to--though they are called to be gracious. And after much fumbling, beauty was settled upon as, if not ideal, certainly the best of the worst options.

Regarding the idea of teaching them "womanly arts"--let me assure you, Labrialumn, that they do teach them such, and I would be lying to say they do not teach them well. They learn to sew, to knit, to cook, to be hostesses and in general provide the support that they are called to. But we also recognize that there is a difference between being dependent and being codependent, and so it is stressed that they should be strong in themselves and in Christ, so that there is naught that they need but what they are called to have. Accordingly, they are taught more--to change tires and check oil and whatnot.

The "finishing school" is expansive, and it would take me more than the brief time I have at the moment to go in-depth about it. When I have the time, I will e-mail you, if it is convenient.

[Mairnéalach]

Tony,

You must read "Future Men", by Doug Wilson. He uses your TR anecdote on the back of the jacket. A great book which has been very profitable for me and my 5-year old.

Inside, he has another beautiful attack on those who would deny boys the use of toy guns and army play. He suggests that, rather than ban this play, simply make it chivalrous. Let the boys murderize one another in role play. If they attack their sister, let them hold a mock war crimes trial.

I've used this angle in a few discussions. Well-placed, it always gets just the right sanctimonious result. I love it.

[labrialumn]

Michael, as a DCE colloquy intern, I would indeed like to hear more.

[labrialumn]

I don't buy into the whole codepency recovery movement. The ethic it promotes appears to be antichrist.

However, I agree that young women need to be taught more than the "womanly arts" I just assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that they would be taught those in the normal course of life, whereas the "womanly arts" appear to be on the way to becoming an esoteric scholarly footnote.

[Michael]

>>I don't buy into the whole codepency recovery movement. The ethic it promotes appears to be antichrist.

However, I agree that young women need to be taught more than the "womanly arts" I just assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that they would be taught those in the normal course of life, whereas the "womanly arts" appear to be on the way to becoming an esoteric scholarly footnote.<<

Ah, we've hijacked the thread to talk about the poor status of womanhood rather than the loss of proper male upbringing. To say the least, we're not trying to help them recover from codependency, but to help them avoid becoming meek women, and accordingly try to show them skills that will help them be strong and independent individuals without losing their identity and role in Christ.

To the editors:

New post so we can carry on this conversation as well! I groan for our young men, but I groan for our young women as well--perhaps even moreso. Admittedly, there is a bias here: I groan because I look at the field of young women I am to enter into, presumably, some relationships with prior to and into marriage (God willing). But they are lost as well, and it is a sad thing.

[Truth Unites...and Divides]

"Dr. Esolen, to destroy a boy in our current society, just sit back and wait. You needn't do anything special at all - this is one of those cases where evil will quickly triumph if good men do nothing." - Joe Long

If it's possible to do an internet high-five, I would give one to Joe Long, especially for that last sentence.

What's really sad, is that when good Christian men and women do something about evil, there are Monday morning quarterback Christians who readily criticize these active Salt and Light Bondservants of Christ, and by their criticism hurt the collective effort and morale of the Body to make a positive difference.

Thankfully, these good Christian men and women will be steadfast in their prayers, steadfast in trusting in the Holy Spirit to guide them as they step out in faith, and to ignore the criticism of moral cowards in the Church.

[Tony Esolen]

Mairnealach,

Thanks for that tip. I'll be on the lookout for it. I notice that that Dangerous Book for Boys is getting some press. Quote from a local radio talk show host: "Every time I'm on a bike path and I see a kid with a helmet, knee pads, shoulder pads, wrist pads, a little part of me dies. And then comes the soccer mom running after him, saying, 'Good gracious, you're going too fast!' Yes, a little part of me dies."

Michael,

I agree, and I've written about it many times. You can't corrupt womanhood without corrupting manhood too, and vice versa; the sexes stand and fail together. Still, boys have been directly aimed at for stifling and suppression -- in our day, the only day I have to act in. They are also, marvelous to say, easier to set right than the girls are now, because they haven't really bought the lessons of androgyny; they've been fed feminist claptrap for twelve years in school, and that's enough to make anybody ready at a moment to question it; their vanity is not engaged in the current system; and the current system gives them nothing to aspire to as men, and nothing to cherish. Anyhow, I'm less comfortable advising on womanhood, because I'm not a woman, and I don't want to presume to tell them everything that womanhood is about; I'm much more reticent about that than about boyhood and manhood.

Here is where the rubbers hit the road, so to speak: the false ideal of "choice," especially as enabled by birth control. Boys may be slightly more likely to reject the pharmacopia than girls are; that at least is my perception. Of course, that may be because they don't have to bear the children. It would make for an interesting discussion to ask which sex, right here, right now, is more deeply anti-child, and what reasons motivate each.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

"...they've been fed feminist claptrap for twelve years in school..." - Professor Tony Esolen

Any ardent feminists in the English department and in the academic senate as a whole at Providence College who, ah-hem, might take a slightly different approach to that statement by a tenured colleague? ;-)

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

"It would make for an interesting discussion to ask which sex, right here, right now, is more deeply anti-child, and what reasons motivate each."

Yeeeesh. It might also be interesting and helpful to ask and discuss what are the root causes for anyone to be anti-child, regardless of gender, since being anti-child is not God's original divine design.

[Judy Warner]

I wonder if there is a physical basis as well as a cultural one for the demasculinization of boys. I can't find the studies, but I've been reading mentions of this for a few years: apparently there is something in soy beans that mimics estrogen. Soy is added to many of our foods and given to infants as soy milk. In Asia, soy is more often consumed in a fermented form, which does not have those estrogen-like properties.

[Mairnéalach]

Judy, that's an interesting idea. Apparently, western diets have had a measurable impact upon menses in teenage girls, compared to other populations.

[Tony Esolen]

Judy,

I've heard a similar thing, actually a chilling thing, about environmental estrogen -- that is, the unmetabolized "extra" estrogen produced artificially and dumped into the ecosystem. I'm told that it is altering the sex ratios in various critters, including mammals. The frightening thing about that, if it is true (and I have no idea whether it is true), is that it would be irremediable, and that after a certain point the artificial alteration of a species' sex ratio would cause it to die off. I mean, there is a reason why sex ratios are what they are, for coyotes, orioles, whatever.

TUAD,

Yes, there are plenty. But they must be thankful for conservative men to give them a cause for unity. Left to themselves, they make a Pekingese look calm. What is the opposite of "equanimity"? Whatever that word is, it is illustrated in the dictionary by a picture of an academic feminist. My friend Beth, a frequent blogger on this site, will, I'm sure, happily provide some stories on that score.

[Beth]

Oh, I could indeed. It has been such a relief to be in Christian colleges the past decade+. We have our feminists, but they are not so wildly committed that one feels one's life is at stake when listening to them. (Though I don't look forward to the inevitable "sexist language" battle that keeps creeping closer.)

I was, though, quite blessed to be at secular universities where there were still some fairly conservative voices in the English departments and I was able to earn some respect from older colleagues based on my ability, with my strange Christian foibles something to shrug at. The more young folk that came into the tenure-track positions, though, the worse the atmosphere became. The gay/lesbian agenda was the worst problem in the places I was, but then I was pretty adroit at avoiding the worst of the feminists for classes when I was a TA and on committees when I was a faculty member.

The most strident feminist I've ever met was also one of the most beautiful women I've ever met -- and dressed like it, too. I always wondered what had happened to her that she was unable to love men, and to receive the love of a good man. Very sad. (Then there were the ones that just drove me batty.)

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

"Left to themselves, they make a Pekingese look calm."

At times I wish I had the gift of acerbic wit. That was funny!

With me, you and Beth are preaching to the choir. I'm in the same corner as you two. I was just joshing you because secular orthodoxy in academia is staunchly and militantly feminist.

[Zamir]

'demasculinization of boys'

boys, these days, are masculine allright, but in virtual space, behind their computer screens
if one looks at games such as Half Life, one can quite understand that these games are more attractive than a walk in the countryside

[Judy Warner]

Vicarious agression is not masculinity.

[Zamir]

there are other elements at play here besides agression
competition, problem solving, speed, adventure, surprise, cooperation, ...

I am not expressing a judgement for or against, just pointing out that some things are the same as in the past, only played out in another way

[Zamir]

Tony,

I don't want to detract from the subject of this thread, but still,just to answer in short, your post:

'I'm afraid history doesn't bear you out. Here are examples of stunning bursts of cultural creativity occurring not despite but because of the camaraderie AND discipline of male groups:'

I am aware of these groups. To take the 'artist studios, employing sometimes dozens of boys, youths, and men, in Renaissance Italy' as an example:

this system, in the form of the 'guilds' was already in existence for a long time. The training of these boys was no training in the creativity of an artist but in the work of an artisan following the rules of his craft.
The creative work was done by men who had left these groups after their training was over, and had become individual artists in their own right.

A da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael,... produced their creative masterpieces after their training.

I would also place the origin of the creative burst of the renaissance more in the meeting of different cultures than in the camaraderie and discipline of these male groups.

on a more abstract level, the combination of elements in a new form, which seems to be one of the aspects of creativity, in other words: the jumping out of bounds of the usual way of thinking, doesn't go easy with discipline

not much creativity in the male groups of Sparta,the Zulu regiments or the Hitler Jugend, I'm afraid.

but maybe this is more at it's place in another thread

[Firinnteine]

Michael, I too would be interested in your handbook and any other materials you may have conveniently available on the whole "finishing school" idea, and the way it plays out at your church.

I'll share the info with my roommate, who is our church's youth minister. :-)

Dr. Esolen -- the "Ten Ways" idea is great, but the really difficult thing for me personally is not to identify What's Wrong with the World (Chesterton already wrote that one, anyhow), but to figure out how in blazes to set it right, when I've been so heavily influenced, sometimes in ways I can't even identify, by that same skewed system. I'll read the book either way, but that book -- what we DO about these problems, how we answer them with a robust, full-blooded Christianity -- is the one I'd really like to see. Something to help my generation (who were never quite taught to be men) train the next generation -- and meanwhile be better men ourselves.

Just a thought from the gallery. :-)

[Judy Warner]

The Washington Post takes a shallow look today at the problem in an article in the Health Section, What Does It Mean to Be Manly?, written by a woman.

[Judy Warner]

The Washington Post takes a shallow look today at the problem in an article in the Health Section, What Does It Mean to Be Manly?, written by a woman.

[aaa]

宿州之窗
[url=http://www.sz-window.com]宿州之窗[/url]
http://www.sz-window.com

[Judy K. Warner]

I'm ending italics here, hoping this will fix the italics all over the site.