Thursday, Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, posted the following on his Facebook page:
This post is part of what seems to be a trend of Driscoll’s obsession with calling out men who he deems “effeminate” and, therefore, aberrant. Driscoll has made his views on masculinity clear in the past, saying that real men do things such as watch UFC fights and that real men would never be stay-at-home dads.
I’ve made it clear on this blog that I’m not a stereotypical guy and that I’m pretty proud of that fact. So when I read Driscoll’s post, I became angry. I’m not a worship leader, but I’m friends with many whom Driscoll would consider “effeminate,” and I share many of their traits. Therefore, I wrote the following today and sent it to his church:
Mr. Driscoll:
Your recent post on Facebook about effeminate worship leaders and your statements about what you define as true masculinity frustrate and upset me.
I’m a man, Mr. Driscoll.
I like baseball, football, soccer and hockey. I build things. I work in the yard. I have no problem rolling up my sleeves and getting dirty.
I also like opera and Broadway. I enjoy symphonic music. I cook, and not just on a grill. I enjoy making pastries. I like eating salads.
I don’t hunt. I have no desire to do so. And although I can appreciate boxing and MMA, I think fighting to solve one’s problems is barbaric.
I’m a writer and a designer and a musician and, from time to time, a poet. I dress well, in clothes that fit my body’s shape. I wear designer shoes and colognes. I use moisturizer on my face and hands.
I’m attracted to women, but I’m not afraid of hugging guys. I think nonsexual physical contact between males has been unfairly maligned and made taboo in our culture.
I love art and dance. I’ve teared up at a sunset. I’ve become lost in beauty.
Why do I tell you all of this, Mr. Driscoll? Because based on your definition of masculinity, I’m not a man. At least, I’m not a proper one. No, based on your definition, I’m “effeminate” and, therefore, deviant.
I’ve spent my life trying to understand true masculinity. I’ve dealt with paradigms such as yours since I was a young boy. I’ve had numerous church leaders hold themselves up as quintessential and condemn any man in the audience who didn’t conform.
The result: Tears and hours of counseling. Breakdowns. Depression. Pain. All because I believed that my expression of masculinity was subpar. All because I believed people like you.
But not anymore. I’m a man, Mr. Driscoll. I’m a man because I do everything in my power to help the less fortunate and the downtrodden. I’m a man because I respect and love others. Most of all, I’m a man because I spend every day striving to be how God wants me to be.
And I refuse to let you or any other bully with a pulpit tell me otherwise.
I’m almost absolutely certain that Driscoll won’t respond. If he does, though, I’ll post it.
Someone that unsure of his sexuality that he beats on those who are not like him should be reminded about another mega-church pastor in the Seattle area, the Rev. Bob Moorehead.
http://www.ctlibrary.com/ct/1998/july13/8t8026.html
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19990521&slug=over21
I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop. I’m not saying I will enjoy it, but it will one day. Christians need to be ready to pick up the pieces when it does.
Thanks so much for this! I don’t know where we get this barbaric view of what a “man” should be. The funny thing is that pretty much %99 of the women I know dream about a man who can be strong and sensative…I think that’s what Jesus was. He was firm, when he needed to be, but he wasn’t afraid to show compassion!
I wonder what Driscoll thinks of all those theologians, in the earliest church, who eschewed the violent practices of the arena, were often celebate even in marriage, and spent the majority of their time studying scrolls and codices rather than doing the more “manly” type activities he describes. Surely he would not dare consider the likes of Tertullian, Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustine and others anything less than men of God.
Love this. I’ve always enjoyed sports- especially contact sports- but I’ve also been a performer my whole life. Broadway musicals are awesome!
Thank you for standing up to him and calling him out. What he is teaching is straight wrong and unbiblical. And you’re right, it’s bullying – just like kids in middle school calling me gay because I wasn’t aggressive or into the same things.
Honestly, it makes me want to write a letter to him as well. Again, thank you and continue to stand up!
Agreed!
I can’t understand how no-one sees the sarcasm in that post. Have any of you been to Mars Hill? Nearly every worship leader there is a skinny white kid. Sure, Driscoll likes to talk about being a “man’s man”, and for the most part I agree with him. While I, like you, am involved heavily with the arts, and do like a nice fresh salad, Driscoll has a point when he talks about our modern US culture making men less manly.
I’ll be interested to see if he responds!
Amen! My husband and I just discussed it. Not every man is a He-Man and not every woman is a Barbie doll with 6 kinds of makeup. There is a continuum of uniqueness in male and female. It disturbs me that a Christian pastor would spend so much time cutting others down.
The problem with this and Dianne Anderson’s letter is that it betrays a deep ignorance of Driscoll’s actual views and his ministry context. What I cannot for the life of me understand is where Driscoll has ever mentioned hobbies as a true indicator of manliness or gender appropriateness. If you could really produce some material by Driscoll that says that you can’t be a man if you do the things that you’ve mentioned, I’m all ears. This status does no such thing.
The greater point that Driscoll’s post and his ministry is trying to make is that if you were born a man, you should not wish you were a woman. I imagine this is a particular issue in a place like Seattle, which has a rapidly growing homosexual demographic. Driscoll’s writings repeatedly tell men that if you were born a man, you were born a man for a reason and for a purpose. Your musical choice or entertainment preferences aren’t really relevant (although sometimes they might make for a poorly aimed joke); what is relevant is whether or not you communicate through your sexuality that who were you born as is not a mistake, but a design, and that God’s call on your life is to fulfill, biblically, your role as a man.
Driscoll himself defines “effeminate” under that post as “1: having feminine qualities untypical of a man : not manly in appearance or manner 2: marked by an unbecoming delicacy or overrefinement.”
This sermon by Driscoll ( http://www.marshillchurch.org/media/proverbs/men-and-masculinity ) is rife with comments about what “real men” should and should not do. “Real men” bow-hunt. “Real men” don’t wear silk. “Real men” don’t hug each other and cry. “Real men” play football, carry guns, own dogs, live in the woods and kill things.
If Driscoll were saying what you’re saying, I’d be OK with it, but he’s not. He’s aggressively promoting a narrow paradigm of masculinity. Masculinity that conveniently looks like him.
Do you even know what you are talking about?
“The greater point that Driscoll’s post and his ministry is trying to make is that if you were born a man, you should not wish you were a woman. I imagine this is a particular issue in a place like Seattle, which has a rapidly growing homosexual demographic. Driscoll’s writings repeatedly tell men that if you were born a man, you were born a man for a reason and for a purpose.”
Rapidly growing homosexual demographic? My dear, Seattle was the first city in the US to pass anti-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation. (Not New York. Not San Francisco. Not LA. Not Chicago.) Maybe you are only becoming aware what has always been around you?
I’m trying to figure out how being a gay man makes you less a man. A gay man has the same physiological functions as a straight man. Being gay does not mean you do not want to hunt, race cars, or ride motorcycles.
There a Jeff Foxworthy joke from about 10 years about the difference between a man and a woman. After giving a complex set of wants for a woman, he said all a man wants to do is have a beer and watch something naked.
(I noticed that Foxworthy told the joke in a way to include straight and gay men.)
Driscoll is basically spouting the same crap that James Dobson did about doing manly things to be a man. Dobson thought it important for a boy to play sports to make that boy into man. He even had a basketball camp in Colorado Springs because of this.
If Driscoll thinks a man has to have sexual intercourse with a woman in order to be a man, what does Driscoll think about John the Baptist or Jesus?
Just for the record, I am correct in what I said about Seattle. This news article places Seattle second only to San Francisco in percentage of LGBT residents http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003432940_gays16m.html?syndication=rss
Oh and yes, I’m aware the study says there’s not “necessarily” rapid growth in LGBT residents, only that the numbers are up. Either way, the point I was making about the ministry demographic of Seattle is still valid
Either you are clueless, do not understand a flawed conclusion when you see one, or you do not know the meaning of the words you write.
The conclusion from that study is suspect, based upon the assumptions made when doing it about people of the same gender living at the same address currently. It also shows little or no understanding about living arrangements in the past. Someone that knew the community would not know it was rapidly growing in Seattle. The community was being more honest.
Remember that Seattle was the first US city to pass civil rights legislation in this area. What does that mean about the numbers in the community? Think about that for a moment. Maybe think about it two or three moments, if you don’t catch it immediately.
What is more humorous is that you thought that a “rapidly growing homosexual demographic” is something to be worried about or required special ministry. Are you afraid of catching “the Gay” from this “rapidly growing homosexual demographic”?
If Driscoll is saying that there is a “rapidly growing homosexual demographic,” then he is even more clueless than I thought he was. (I do not know if Driscoll is saying this. I only know what you are proposing.) We are already your neighbors and in your churches. You probably don’t notice, because we are doing the same things everyone else does.
If Driscoll really thinks that butching it up is a cure for homosexuality, maybe I’ll have to give him a ride on my Honda VTX 1800S sometime. I promise to wear all my leather–which actually has been on a motorcycle before, serving its intended purpose.
(Gasp! A gay man that rides a big cruiser! He watches shows on Speed when at a biker bar in Monroe, Washington! People at this biker bar know I’m gay and don’t give a flying fig! There are times reading the thoughts of Søren Kierkegaard and Dietrich Bonhoeffer about Christians make a lot of sense.)
One more thought about butching it up as a cure for homosexuality. Have you ever noticed the “characters” in the Village People? It is really Roosevelt Grier you need to worry about. This former NFL player, who is now an ordained minister, does needlepoint. http://www.amazon.com/Rosey-Griers-Needlepoint-Men-Grier/dp/0802704212
I would love to see the Grier’s thoughts about Driscoll saying men should not do sissy things.
Mark Driscoll is very narrow minded. His view of Jesus as being some kind of prize fighter says it all.
http://www.gregboyd.org/blog/revelation-and-the-violent-prize-fighting-jesus/
Manhood is a spectrum not a single position. There are those of us who would very rarely shed a tear and others who are moved by expressions of beauty.
There are this who are built like barn doors and others of a slighter frame.
There are some with good dress sense and others with out a clue what to wear (me included).
The problem with people like mark Driscoll is that they don’t understand nuance. Such people often appear to talk with authority about all kinds of subjects and yet understand very little.
If they are not right wing Calvinistic preachers they are usual journalist in the gutter press.
I think the FB post was mean & rude, whether he meant for it to be, or not.. But, I also think if we’re truly walking w/Jesus, we need to be quick to listen, slow to speak, & slow to anger. Can we not call out this error, & then forgive & move on? I guess I’m naive or ill-informed, but I don’t see how this vitriol is helping change anything. And I don’t see how it’s undone all of the good things he’s done.
I could understand your concern if Mark showed any remorse for his comments. So far he hasn’t.
I think you underestimate the real damage people like him do to men who don’t conform to his stereotype.
If I had a son who was crushed by this behaviour I would speak out as I and others on this page have done. As it is I am speaking out for the many I know who are hurt by such nonsense.
If you think that this is cruel that is your view. I think an alternative voice to the very vocal mr Driscoll is needed.
Interesting point of view … at least Pastor Mark has got hundreds of people blogging about masculinity. As have you.
Wow. Well said! I think this guy is insecure about himself. That is why he feels the need to tell others how to live, and of course because he is a ‘pastor’ whatever that means these days!!!
This was a phenomenal response! Thank you for the courage to say exactly what needed to be said. My favorite quote from your post, ” And I refuse to let you or any other bully with a pulpit tell me otherwise.” Unfortunately, spiritual bullying does seem to be on the rise within the church, and this pastor was indeed an example of that. Bold statement on your behalf, and I stand with you.
I love the end where you describe a real man. Thanks for sharing!
This is a beautiful letter. Well done. Much more eloquent than my own CAPSLOCK!RAGE, foaming-at-the-mouth response to Driscoll’s status. No, I don’t imagine he will respond or that anything you’ve written will alter his perceptions one bit. His whole ministry and the fact that thousands of young people (including my own sister) flock to it is very demoralising. All we can do is stand up and show that he is not unopposed, and that his detractors are thoughtful, intelligent human beings.
Is Mark D gay and overcompensating? I do wonder
Well said, Brian.
Maybe we all need to send Driscoll a copy of this book: http://www.amazon.com/Rosey-Griers-Needlepoint-Men-Grier/dp/0802704212
Usually, I love me some Mark Driscol, but this is one area where I strongly disagree with him. Well said Brian.
@ Bob Chapman,
Good grief, calm down. You’re becoming incoherent.
You know very well what my point is. If you challenge the content of the study, then it’s UCLA’s word against yours. That’s your right, but you’ll forgive me for going with the academic study.
Secondly, stop being absurd. Driscoll is very open about his conservative evangelical beliefs, and of course given that he would view the demands of pastoral ministry in Seattle as different than, say, Birmingham.
Thirdly, I find it ironic that you, as a gay man, have sounded more hateful just now, than anything Driscoll has said or posted. How I have personally attacked you in any way to justify your calling me ignorant or attacking my intellect? I have said nothing but an opinion that I have been careful to explain thoughtfully and without animosity. I believe homosexuality is sinful, but I have just been outdone in meanness by the very man who accuses me of bigotry.
Oh well.
There have also been studies that concluded all gay men have multiple sexual partners and engaged in harmful practices. There have been other studies that concluded all gay men have better jobs and incomes from most men. There have been studies that equated homosexuality with depression and other psychological issues.
These studies were later shown to be trash because of their methodology. You need to learn the signs of surveys and studies that weren’t well thought out so you don’t make statements you later need to retract.
(Researchers at big name schools make mistakes. This is shown through peer review of published papers and further research. This is the whole idea of publishing papers in the academic world: the see if they hold up to further investigation and further study.)
I’m not the one being absurd. By Driscoll’s definitions, Roosevelt Grier needs to stop doing needlepoint because it isn’t what God wants for men. That is absurd.
If you understood what homosexuality (and heterosexuality) is and when it was defined, you would know the Bible cannot speak about the subject, at least directly. (Homosexuality and heterosexuality were first defined in the 1800s.) That makes the search for an answer a lot more difficult.
Homosexuality and heterosexuality is not a matter of behavior, but a matter of what a person is. To pretend you are something you are not is bearing false witness against your neighbor–an action that is covered in Scripture.
if homosexuality wasn’t defined until the 1800′s, then what does Romans 1 define?..”men’s burning lust for each other”…hmmm
What is the context of that? False worship or idolatry.
While the term “temple prostitution” is not the most accurate to describe the activity, it is commonly used to describe the activity.
That is not homosexuality.
By the way, such worship was considered a manly thing to do in Grecian culture of the day. Paul was telling Christians to avoid the manly thing and don’t worship that way.
Bob,
I think the bible could say something about homosexuality because they understood gender roles and what they considered “normal” sexual practices (whatever that is) long before the 1800′s. Also, you don’t need to have defined a term for something for it to be wrong.
However, a good starting point of this discussion is what the actual Greek and Hebrew texts say about homosexuality. From all that I can tell, the English version translates a pretty narrow term (relationships between young men taking favors for sex from older men, or male sex slaves, for example) as any male sexual relation, when it could be denigrating the pay for sex part of the act.
I don’t know how Jesus would have interpreted that text, or even if that is something that would have carried over as I eat unclean foods and hang out with my wife during her time of the month, which the bible is much more clear on.
As long as someone worships God, proclaims Jesus as savior, and actively makes the world around them better, I struggle with thinking God dislikes what they are doing in His kingdom.
Mostly I’m glad I don’t have to make the choice.
Paul not using the standard term in Biblical Greek for adult male lovers implies very strongly that this type of relationship was not meant by him in Romans.
The types of words used in Scripture that some equate with homosexuality all appear to be behavior-based terms. Homosexuality (and heterosexuality) are not behavior-based terms. That is why one should be very carefully when trying to say certain passages about homosexuality.
One needs to figure out what behavior is being addressed (and it is not a sex act).
this letter is precisely the kind of response driscoll and many others need to see. thanks for posting this!
I wonder if Pastor Driscoll bullies the women in his congregation in the manner as he does the men.
Decide for yourself by looking at the links.
http://rachelheldevans.com/mark-driscoll-bully
Pingback: The day Mark Driscoll almost apologized. And should have. But didn’t. | λογοι
Pingback: Bad Behavior « terra firma
Pingback: The confessions of a cage fighter: masculinity, misogyny, and the fear of losing control (via The Other Journal) | λογοι
Pingback: Evangelical Accountability in the Social Media Age: The Case of Mark Driscoll, Provacateur « Religious Rhetorics
I’m one of the most conservative women you’ll meet, but Driscoll’s Facebook post angers me. I’m a violinist, and more than one minister has tried to pull the absurd “music is for women and sissies” angle. Have you been to an orchestra concert? It’d be one of the most diverse experiences of your life. There is no stereotype that musicians fit into. Have you seen the percussion section, or perhaps the brass section? Some of those instruments need a man to lift them! His post is offensive to male musicians everywhere, and most of the ones I know are pretty normal guys (you know what I mean; you wouldn’t see one of them on the street and guess, “classical musician.”) Ironically, women weren’t allowed in orchestras until after the women’s suffrage movement—and the Vienna Philharmonic didn’t allow them until 1997! Because music is a historically male profession, I find this argument by ministers to be bull-headed, inaccurate, and unfair in its representation of musicians.
Now about gender. My husband is a guy that Driscoll (and one minister in particular mentioned above) would consider “effeminate.” However, that’s only before you know him. My husband is secure in himself, doesn’t laugh at inappropriate things, works hard to provide, and is passionate. To me, that makes him one of the most Biblically masculine people I’ve met, and I have no problem filling both of the ears of someone who says or implies otherwise! God makes it clear in the Bible that we should not judge based on outward appearances, and that’s exactly what people do with masculinity. The definition is flawed. It’s sad.
That’s not to say that I’m not misunderstanding Driscoll’s Facebook post, but if I were to see it standing alone, I would have written the same thing in a comment.