A reply to Will Knowland’s “Patriarchy or Degeneracy: Christian Masculinity vs. The Red Pill”

Mr. Knowland’s response to my editorial is a prime example of what I have called “the Other Side of Feminism.” It’s an ideology expressed through programs such as Exodus 90 and other “man up” grifts, by which I mean that they are essentially money-making schemes that blame men for problems caused by feminism.

Mr. Knowland says that, on the one hand, I was “right to recognize the crisis of masculinity” but that, on the other, I failed to see that “the real problem” is that “the Christians are pussyfooting around Church teaching” because Church leaders are “ashamed of its perennial teachings in favor of the patriarchy and against feminism.”

Knowland is wrong on both counts. 

I neither mentioned a so-called “crisis of masculinity” in my editorial—indeed, the word “masculinity” never appears once in my editorial—nor did I fail to see that “Christians are pussyfooting around Church teaching.” In fact, the entire point of my piece was that programs such as Exodus 90 work hand-in-hand with feminism. They do this by teaching men that their calling is to become more manly so they can measure up to the lofty standard of being worthy of serving women, even though Scripture makes clear that “woman was made for man, not man for woman.”

Far from refuting my arguments about Exodus 90, which Knowland failed to engage whatsoever (he opted instead to write what is essentially a review of Timothy Gordon’s book), Knowland revealed that his own views fall prey to the very kind of mistake I highlighted in my piece.

For example, Knowland acknowledges the obvious fact that feminism plagues our society, and yet, apparently, his only solution is for men to be leaders. Quoting Timothy Gordon, he writes:

Only men can lead the way out of feminism because it is up to the men of society to reclaim patriarchy. Expecting women to lead the way out is feminism. Men must face the fact that feminism involves not only female but also male failure… Men must fight back by taking hold of society one family—one married couple—at a time.

This is simply a rehashing of the same flawed thinking that characterizes the second type of grifting I discussed in my piece: Catholic macho-men influencers—such as Timothy Gordon—who instruct men to partake in bizarre self-flagellation programs like Exodus 90 in the hope that they will one day win approval from their women by becoming so-called good men.

The argument of the man-up grift can be summarized as follows:

1. Women are naturally attracted to and follow manly men.
2. Therefore, if today’s men were manly, women would marry and follow today’s men.
3. Women are not marrying or following today’s men, as evidenced by our feminist society with rampant divorce and a shrinking number of marriages.
4. Therefore, today’s men are not manly.
5. Therefore, men are to blame for the collapse of the family and society today, and it is up to men to become manly and take back the patriarchy one married couple at a time.

You will notice that according to this line of reasoning:

1. Women are not to blame. Women bear none of the responsibility for the destruction of the family—or they are at most a minor contributor.
2. Men are primarily to blame, and, furthermore, men bear the entire responsibility for fixing the society that women have destroyed with their political liberties—as evidenced by the millions of abortions as well as the disproportionate number of divorces that women initiate.
3. To even suggest that women may be to blame or that they bear the primary responsibility for the destruction of the family in modern society, or to say that men do not nor should they aspire to measure up to women’s standards is somehow “feminist.” 

These three points illustrate how the conservative Christian “man-up” grift fails to confront feminism—nay, it bolsters it.  

Feminism seeks to empower women in society with the goal of attaining social equality with men. But by their nature, women can never be men’s equals. To give but one example: Men can practice sexual promiscuity without the ever-present risk of becoming pregnant, but women cannot. 

Therefore, modern society decided to give women social power and to deny it to men. For example, women have a “right” to easy abortions, and when they do not opt for abortion, men must pay for child support. Without these rights granted to women and responsibilities imposed on men, feminism will never achieve the supposed equality that it seeks.

Men are thus generally assumed to be responsible for women’s actions. Men must now be subject to baseless slanders of rape and abuse upon the hearsay testimony of women who slept around and failed to find happiness. And, of course, women must never be held accountable for their actions. 

This is why there will always be those such as Mr. Knowland saying things like, “Only men can lead the way out of the mess today,” and “Men must face the fact that not only women but men have failed too,” and “Any other view is a narrative that makes men emasculated victims.” 

Feminism demands that women be perpetual victims, both historically and at the present time, while men must always be accountable, either as historical oppressors or as contemporary masculine failures.

Mr. Knowland’s reply, which nominally acknowledges the problem of feminism, presents no solution whatsoever for addressing the imbalance of social power that women now hold over men legally and culturally. He does not even acknowledge such an imbalance. He cannot do so because, according to his own ideology, that would be to place the responsibility for the economic and moral ills of society on the shoulders of women.

Such an admission is too dangerous for the “man up” crowd because it leads men to radical conclusions. Some may conclude that social power must be taken from women, that so-called equal rights will have to be curtailed, and—worst of all—that women will have to be held accountable for their actions.

Apparently, none of these steps are necessary for Mr. Knowland’s desired restoration of so-called Catholic Integralism or Christendom in general. He would rather blame individual men, and his only solution to the scourge of feminism is men manning-up. Supposedly only then will women follow men back into the patriarchy.

As Mr. Knowland writes, “This worked when Christianity rose from the ashes of fallen Rome. And it will work again.” Sounds simple, doesn’t it?

Evidently, the Christian family norm and political Christendom were the result of individual men with no social power choosing to take cold showers and “be her leader.” And if you disagree, you’re a degenerate, blackpilled red-piller!