Monday, 12 February 2018

Modern "be like men" feminism is redundant

A comment I just posted on someone else's blog...

* * *

The observation that this post makes, is of wide and general application. When 'feminism' persuades women to behave like men (which is a really weird set of behaviours to label as 'feminism' rather than 'masculinism'), it persuades women to make themselves redundant.

Men already exist.

What women have, that men don't, is femininity. 'Feminism' treats femininity as worthless or pointless. But it is itself the thing that is worthless/pointless. No sane person who appreciates the real virtues of a godly woman would trade them for something else.

Thursday, 1 February 2018

Do you agree with Ofsted that evangelical Christianity is dangerous, anti-British extremism?

Do you agree with Ofsted that evangelical Christianity is dangerous, anti-British extremism?

And if not, are you going to do anything about it?

In a speech reported in The Times today, the head of Ofsted used the Christian Institute - which defends nothing more than mainstream evangelical Christianity - as an example of dangerous extremism whose ideas need to be explicitly and deliberately combated by school-teachers.

That Ofsted thinks and operates like this - quite openly, quite explicitly - is is not really news. The aggressive promotion of a particularly intolerant brand of secularism to all schoolchildren under its remit has been normal for Ofsted for several years. They don't expect to be contradicted if they say, and operate, in accordance with the idea that mainstream evangelical Christianity is extreme and dangerous, and that combating it is a child welfare issue.

But it is, unfortunately, apparently still news - or too hard to believe - for large swathes of evangelical Christians and churches in the UK. We are, by and large, quite happy to keep having our children educated under a regime run along these lines, in the naive and wrong beliefs that a) they probably don't mean it, and b) even if they do mean it, it doesn't make a difference to what happens at school, and c) even if it does influence them, then we can undo that fairly easily.

I'm convinced that everybody who claims to believe these things really does. I'm sure there's a large element of fear involved. If we admit that it's really the case, that has implications. It'll involve blood, sweat, and tears - not least in dealing with fellow Christians who disagree with us. And who wants that?

Well, ultimately, we should want it - because we want to please Jesus, and that means, not allowing our children to be indoctrinated into intolerant, aggressive secularism 6-7 hours a day, 5 days a week. We have to choose, and quickly, whilst the window of opportunity is still open for us to do so.

Thursday, 25 January 2018

Hilarious/tragic but true: world atheist convention cancelled

The theme was to be "Reason for hope". So really, it seems that the atheists were being ruthlessly consistent.... atheism, of course, has to end in nihilism. "Hope" is an artificial construct, with no objective reality in an atheistic universe. It's just evolution resulting in brain chemistry. There can't be hope for humanity if there is nothing beyond the universe, nothing greater than humanity that can speak into humanity's plight. "Hope" that is generated from humanity, out of necessity, is just personal sentiment, and as such purely subjective. The only objective final goal/destination in the atheistic universe is heat death and nothingness.

Salt and light : the lady who led the fight against Larry Nassar is an evangelical Christian

The appalling case of USA Gymnastics and now-convicted serial sexual abuser Larry Nassar has been in the news a lot today, and in the preceding weeks.

The bringing of this monstrous evil to light stems from the courageous actions of Rachael Denhollander, an athlete abused by Nassar.

You can hear Rachael Denhollander give her story here:

What's that behind her, on the right of the video? A Bible, and a whole book-case of heavy-duty resources for serious Bible study - evangelical Bible commentaries, theological resources, and (familiar to very many Bible college students) "Elements of New Testament Greek" for studying Koine Greek (the Greek of the New Testament).

So, a true and brave Christian lady. Salt and light in a dark world, from Jesus Christ, working through weak human beings, making a real difference. Something the media didn't see fit to talk about, anywhere I've seen, no doubt because by and large, they don't understand it, and can't fit it into any of their boxes. It's not because she kept it quiet, and we can benefit from her clear and gracious testimony. Justin Taylor here records in words and links to the video of her Christian testimony in court as she called both for justice from the court, and personally called upon Nassar to seek and find the grace that is in Christ, that he might find gospel mercy before he faces God's eternal justice:

Update: I found her husband's Twitter account, in which he has a #1689 hashtag in his profile - The "1689" being the principle confession of faith of the Calvinistic Baptists (such as myself). The same Twitter bio gives "Louisville, Kentucky" as home; that being the town which hosts the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, where he's either a PhD student or has already completed. Here's some of his work, which is explicitly tied in to the Nassar case:

Saturday, 20 January 2018

Cathy Newman versus Jordan Peterson : mismatch of the century

You should definitely watch this, and all of it. You should do so both for all that you'll learn from it, and for the sheer, high-quality humour in seeing invincible ignorance meet with overwhelming force of logic, clarity and (in today's context, courageous) refusal to be cowed by bluster and nonsense. Though, it's a shame that Peterson's powerful and important initial message for men (on which, see here), gets over-shadowed by Newman's failed attempts to turn him into cartoon woman-hater.

You should, before watching it, understand that Cathy Newman is not a thickie reading a list of questions cooked up by some underpaid, overworked beginner in the research assistant role. She's not been set up to look like an idiot. Rather, she is herself a seasoned feminist campaigner, over a number of years, at a national level, pushing her own self-consciously chosen agenda and asking her own questions, educated at Charterhouse and the University of Oxford (where she obtained a first). That's why, as she gets completely dismantled by clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson (either an agnostic, or cultural Christian, according to Wikipedia - at one point almost at the end he appeals to conventional evolutionary theory), it's so very devastating. Time, and again, she (despite having 30 minutes at her leisure to develop however she wished) tries to perform a "gotcha" on him with a simplistic misunderstanding in the guise of an argument or question, in order to trip him up and prove that he's a bigot; time, and again, he exposes the sheer shallowness and lack of factual basis, behind what she's saying. Time and again, she lets loyalty to her cause refuse to let her hear what that's been said, and time and again, he clinically unpicks her confusion. At the end, she's left with nothing more trying to make him responsible for unspecified rude comments made by unnamed people on the Internet. It's that clinical.

The problem in the culture we face is a) that it's pretty rare for campaigners like Cathy Newman to set themselves up like this. Because of their strangehold among the media gatekeepers, they don't need to parade the vacuousness of their slogans in this way; and b) the factors that allow people like Jordan Peterson to still exist in academia (just) unfortunately don't allow them to exist in the same way in contemporary politics (which largely rewards the parading of vacuous slogans). But watching this would be a good start.

Sunday, 14 January 2018

Peter Hitchens on "Lady Chatterley's Lover"

"Central London in those days had plenty of grubby shops, which remained open through a mixture of corruption and discretion. They served the rather small numbers who at that time were ready to risk being seen in these quarters. They accordingly charged high prices to clients who were in no position to complain. Their purpose was to deprave and corrupt, and nobody doubted it. This was the underbelly of puritan society, and the tribute that vice paid to virtue.

But it was the underbelly, secret and shady, not the upper surface, and the frontier between that milieu and normality was well-defined. The trial ended that distinction and tore down that frontier."