From creation, it’s been clear that God created males and females to fulfill different roles. In modern terms, that’s expressed as men being from Mars and women from Venus. In Genesis 3:16–19, after the Fall, God did not condemn Adam to painful childbirth; he consigned that burden to Eve. For Adam, the punishment was toil with little reward, while Eve was told, in translations such as the NLT, that her desire would be to control her husband, which seems like penance for both.
Read more Massachusetts Madness
Today, traits more commonly associated with males are increasingly viewed in society as negative, and feminizing males has been collectively endorsed by those who believe that the patriarchy is the cause of all the world’s problems. As if the following list were meant to set the standard for how the whole world should operate, English sociologist and wrote in Taking It Like a Woman (1984), “Without men the world would be a better place: softer, kinder, more loving; calmer, quieter, more humane.”
One surprising contradiction to the perception of males as big, tough, strong, testosterone-fueled beasts is that male fetuses have a ~10-percent higher stillbirth rate than female fetuses. And infant homicide rates, based on 2017–2020 data, found that boys died at a higher rate of 8.22 per 100,000 births versus 5.95 for little girls.
For decades, many Martians have humbly submitted to the cultural belief that their God-given qualities are inherently negative and have slowly suppressed what is inherently male. “Boys will be boys” is no longer an acceptable excuse for boys being boys; thus, Venusians are demanding that Martians act as though they hail from Venus, not Mars.
In today’s society, male behavior is widely seen as something that needs to be modified. According to feminine standards, communication, emotion, and behavior should be reshaped into a feminized maleness. God forbid a chivalrous, albeit “benevolently sexist,” man hold a door open for an independent feminist, but if he should follow her lead and brush past her as she goes through the door, he’s accused of being a thoughtless brute. Either way, he’s wrong.
Women today also cite male stereotypes of stoicism as a lack of sensitivity. Energetic rambunctiousness, roughhousing, impulsiveness, and what some women define as intimidation are labeled as male aggression.
This tendency to view manliness as problematic, along with some of the details made public of late concerning incidents of maternal filicide, raises a disturbing question: When a mother describes a son, whom his nanny describes as “full of energy, rambunctious, funny, silly,” as “the most difficult human I have ever encountered,” is it possible that the cultural perception of maleness as undesirable has influenced how some women view little boys whose behavior is challenging?
Lest we forget, women have already been granted an indulgence by society to decide whether a child conceived by both a man and a woman lives or dies. The question now is whether — within some women’s minds — this autonomy extends beyond the womb.
If society increasingly insists that masculinity is largely a construct shaped by negative patriarchal control rather than God-ordained traits, what happens when little boys display sex-typical behavior before they’re old enough to understand what women interpret as toxic masculinity? Is this how little boys who are acting like little boys become targets of sex discrimination?
In the Lindsay Clancy case, during the murders, her son Dawson appears to have been treated differently from Cora, a girl, and Callan, a boy too young to be rowdy.
The problem for toddler boys is that they cannot read memos on required male behavior or negotiate with females about boyhood tendencies and the negative traits of masculinity. Clearly, little Dawson, who would be six years old had he survived, didn’t know how males are supposed to behave when interacting with Millennial females.
Read more Democrats In Disarray: The Cost Of Success
Given the more pronounced petechiae observed at Dawson’s autopsy, it is possible that he struggled more than his sister and infant brother. Did Lindsay believe that this male child, whom she described as a “difficult human,” was less compliant? Could that have had anything to do with Lindsay asphyxiating him first, alone in his father’s office?
There is a heartbreaking contrast in Patrick’s 911 call. After finding Dawson, the child Lindsay had described as “the most difficult human I have ever encountered,” his distraught father called him simply “my buddy, my little boy, my buddy.”
Meanwhile, in Frankfort, Illinois, Corie Walsh, a 40-year-old woman described as deeply invested in the Lindsay Clancy trial, allegedly killed her two-year-old son, Barrett “Bear” Walsh. According to authorities, she explained that she placed a ligature around his neck and hung her baby boy from a rafter because he was the “devil” and the “anti-Christ.”
Unlike Cora and Callan, Barrett’s three siblings survived their mother’s wrath. But the question is whether Dawson and Barrett were victims of a culture that has redefined male behavior, and whether these perceptions are shaping how women and society as a whole view little boys who have not yet adapted to Venusian standards.
When was the last time any of us heard a woman call a female child a “devil” or “anti-Christ”?
After the mistrial, as expected, the female jurors in the Clancy case have been especially vocal in criticizing a lone male holdout. One woman complained that the male juror “couldn’t get off the fact that Lindsay viciously murdered her children,” as though jurors were supposed to “get off the fact” that three helpless babies were strangled to death by their mother’s hands. What’s shocking is that this juror’s refusal to look beyond the act, rather than the act itself, is being treated as the problem.
Another confusing belief that inverts or blurs the distinction between manliness and womanliness is the current trend to distort biologically sound sexual differences, which serves to feminize masculinity and foster the cultural demonization of masculine tendencies. Now, are little boys, being boys, who haven’t caught up with the diktats of gullible, easily duped gender-identity peddlers, being penalized for the sin of doing what comes naturally?
This anti-male sentiment surely has a spiritual dimension. Genesis 3:15 established enmity involving the woman’s male offspring; Pharaoh ordered the Hebrew sons killed; and when seeking baby Jesus, Herod targeted male children. Revelation 12 depicts the dragon seeking to devour the male child, and now we see the possibility that animosity toward behavior modern society tends to view as intrinsically male may be affecting how mentally disturbed women view the conduct of male children through the distorted lens of “pathologized masculinity.”
On this side of Eden, the problem is that women decided that, in order to survive, the Martians must adapt to Venusian ways.
As the struggle for control in the Garden suggests, some men, believing the lie that their sex disqualifies them from being themselves, have shrunk back and, through intimidation and shaming, have relinquished their God-given male traits. That retreat has left some men unwilling to assume proper headship. Now, while troubled women commit maternal filicide against male children, little boys are suffering the consequences of men’s collective retreat, and that is the travesty.
Read more Trump finally puts Obamacare to good use
Unfortunately, the smallest Martians among us still haven’t gotten the memo.
Image via Pixabay.