Oct 12, 2023·edited Oct 12, 2023

Another good article. I would be interested to hear what feedback you have received from your Wall Street Journal article. Did anyone cite you or get in touch to agree or disagree? Do you think some of them will change their approach now?

Expand full comment

Aaron mentioned the "healthy masculine package." An essential component of this is male leadership in society. This should be promoted over and against what feminists say about it.

The Bible strongly supports this position. But even if a person is non-Christian, he can look to human history to support this position. Suppose that you are an atheist and an evolutionist. Then you would surely agree that whatever behaviors are innate to human beings are determined by our genetics. Because our genetic makeup is natural, whatever innate behaviors flow from our genetics are also natural. To oppose our nature would be counter-productive and damaging to us. Now consider prehistoric times before man's mind was fully developed and consider the grand sweep of history all the way up to pre-industrial society. During this whole period, men were the movers and shakers of the world. What are we to conclude from this? Surely, this state of affairs was natural. Human beings were differentiated as male and female, each sex with its own physical and mental characteristics. These characteristics were genetically determined and in harmony with different sex roles in society. It would be silly to argue that male exploitation of women was the cause of different sex roles. Rather, the difference in the sex roles that existed from the earliest times was a natural consequence of our genetics.

Today, our technological society makes it possible for men and women to deviate from roles that are natural, but that is very unwise. To do what is inconsistent with our nature can only lead to unhappiness and even failure. And we are seeing that failure on a massive scale today.

Men should recognize that they are designed to be the movers and shakers in society. Men will not be happy until they re-discover their proper role. Women will likewise be happier if they re-discover theirs. Feminists will reject this, but feminism itself must be rejected.

A number of observers are starting to point out that men feel uncomfortable resisting feminism because they feel it is an attack on women. Men need to realize that it is not an attack on women, but a desire to put society back on course. Rejecting feminism will take courage. Men will be called every name in the book: sexists, misogynists, haters, misogamists, and probably racists, homophobes, and anti-trans as well. But men are designed to be courageous. And it might well be that the feminist monster would shatter with less firepower than we think. It is full of self-contradictions.

Expand full comment

I’m curious why you’re skeptical about the results of the Swiss study. Obviously it was done 30 years ago and I’m not sure it’s ever been reproduced. But it seems reasonable that fathers give some kind of authority to a belief. Maybe? I’m not questioning your assertion that we shouldn’t use men as a means to an end. But is it wrong to let men know that behaviors have lasting impacts on their children? Similar to how we encourage women to breastfeed for the health of her child?

Expand full comment