John Piper’s influence is, he says, ‘irrespective of competency’

John Piper shall, henceforth, be referred to as John “Irrespective of Competency” Piper.

Piper despises competency, dismissing it as folly:

Suppose, I said, a couple of you students, Jason and Sarah, were walking to McDonald’s after dark. And suppose a man with a knife jumped out of the bushes and threatened you. And suppose Jason knows that Sarah has a black belt in karate and could probably disarm the assailant better than he could. Should he step back and tell her to do it? No. He should step in front of her and be ready to lay down his life to protect her, irrespective of competency. It is written on his soul. That is what manhood does.

And collectively that is what society does — unless the men have all been emasculated by the suicidal songs of egalitarian folly.

No. There is no such thing as an enduring society that operates “irrespective of competency.”

Any society that tried to function “irrespective of competency” would quickly fail due to, you know, incompetency.

How does someone like Piper say such clownish things and yet become so influential in so many evangelical churches? Why is such buffoonery accepted as a credible lecture on the meaning of “manhood”?

Apparently those churches abide by Piper’s rules and chase after leaders “irrespective of competency.”

At least Piper has finally admitted why he fears women’s leadership in the church — because if the church began choosing its leaders based on competency instead of arbitrary hierarchies that operate “irrespective of competency,” then he’d be out of a job.

“Irrespective of competency.” He said that, voluntarily. He admitted that out loud. Oy.

 

  • http://twitter.com/MarySueTwiteth Mary Sue

    Also goes to show John Piper knows nothing about martial arts, you’re always taught to first avoid or disengage from a situation before resorting to martial arts skills — so even though I am a female and I have a green belt in aikido (which is solely focused on defense), my first reaction is to run away.

    There’s just one dude with a knife! RUN LIKE HELL!

  • http://twitter.com/mikailborg Michael O’Brien

    So, when John Piper says he’d rather die than allow a woman to take care of a job she’s better at, he means that quite literally. Got it.

  • MaryKaye

    I just cannot express how angry this passage makes me. Protecting the man’s ego–which is all that John’s intervention is doing–is not only more important than the woman’s ego, but more important than either person’s *survival*.

    I got, to my deep surprise, into a fight on the street a few weeks ago–a very short fight:  I slammed into a man who had just knocked down a woman and was standing over her, and he backed off.  The hell with masculinity, the hell with ego, the hell with John Piper:  sometimes you have to do something and you do it because you can.  (And the society that teaches that the man has to generally teaches that the woman *can’t*.  Otherwise, you know, Sarah’s probably faster than John, with the training and all.  Can’t have that.)

    I don’t know why he backed off.  I am in fact a martial artist and I may have looked threatening.  Or he may have been looking behind me at several people who might well have backed me up.  Or being slammed may just have made him realize he didn’t really want to be doing what he was doing–which is what the woman said, more or less, when I helped her up. 

    If it had been me and my husband, not just me–it would have happened exactly the same.  I am the more impetuous one.  But it would have been nice having him backing me up, for sure.

    I truly cannot express how angry this passage makes me.  It’s like he thinks it’s a fucking *game*, this guy with a knife jumping out.

  • Becca Stareyes

    Because it will really help Sara to have to deal with a bystander getting in the way and probably injured or used as a hostage.  So Piper’s apparent view of manhood is to put the male ego above success with minimal harm, and ability to not hinder someone they care about.  
    Sounds about right.  I think I’ll stick to competence and success if it’s all the same to him.  

  • other lori

    John Piper is a terrible human being. A while back I got his book Think for free from Christian Audio, and I recently listened to some of it in a fit of masochism. The thing that struck me most was how important it is to him that the vast majority of people–including the vast majority of those who identify as Christians–be destined for eternal torment. It brings him enormous pleasure to imagine that most people will be consciously tormented for all eternity. He doesn’t think it’s regrettable or sad; he thinks it’s awesome and glorious. He is a sick man. On some level I feel kind of sorry for him, because it sounds, from other things of his I’ve seen, that he was raised by horribly racist fundamentalists, and I suppose I can give him some credit for at least not being horribly racist (he was pretty much the only popular conservative Christian who had a response to the Trayvon Martin shooting that didn’t make me want to scream). 

    I found it interesting how much ire he had toward relativism as the enemy of Christianity. I’m pretty sure he’d say that the emergent church is more wrong than the New Atheists. There’s really nothing about the New Atheist idea of God that he’d disagree with, after all; God is indeed a genocidal megalomaniac who revels in the eternal conscious torment of most of humanity. A far bigger danger, for him, is that people might think God is too loving. So he goes and slays the windmills of the emergent church, as if millions of people are being turned from good orthodox Calvinism each year because Tony Jones is just that influential, ignoring the fact that the idea of God he presents is the one being picked up and turned against religion by the larger world. We’re a culture of positivists, not postmodernists, but Piper just can’t seem to accept that.

  • Chloe Lewis

    In actual masculine-egos-first relationships, I find, the competent woman is expected to do the work while making squeaky noises indicating that she’s terribly dependent on the man. So tiring.
     

  • other lori

    I’m not sure either of them should be fighting the would-be attacker, as noted above. He’s a dude with a knife; just get out of there.

    I mean, on the one hand, I can sort of see what he could be saying if he weren’t such a bad person: if the situation were as described except, instead of a couple, it were a parent and child, I get it. One of my kids could maybe grow up to be a martial arts expert, but I think that, as a parent, if we were in a situation where we were forced to deal with an attacker, I do think I’d offer myself, even if my child were a fully-competent adult who maybe could take the person down. 

    The problem is that Piper seems to think that self-sacrificial love is something only men are called to, when I don’t think there’s anything in the teachings of Jesus or the New Testament to back that. Laying down your life for another is held up as an illustrative example of agape love, but it isn’t presented as gender-specific. From a Christian perspective, I think you’d have to argue that both Sarah and Jason should be willing to give their lives to protect the other, if they love each other. The idea that Jason is called to self-sacrificing love and Sarah, presumably, is just supposed to stand there doing nothing is absurd. 

    So I guess I don’t think the problem is really with Jason jumping in front of Sarah to protect her, because I do think that’s love’s instinct. The problem is that we’re supposed to imagine he’s doing that because that’s his role as a man, and not because that’s what love asks of all of us.

  • Lori

    When I and other feminists say that misogyny hurts everyone this is what we’re talking about.  How much do you have to hate men to say that it’s “written on their souls” to be fucking morons? How much to you have to hate men to do everything in your power to train them to value false ego over their lives, not to mention the lives of people they care about? A lot, that’s how much.

    Piper is the male supremacist and I’m the man-hating feminazi and yet I have a much higher regard for men than he does. I think many of them know better than this. I think many of those who don’t currently know better are fully capably of knowing better if people like Piper would stop training them from birth to be suicidally stupid. Idiocy is not written on the male soul.

    I’ve said this about other Christian leaders and I’ll say it again about Piper—-he better hope that he’s wrong about the existence of God and I’m right. Because if the God Piper claims to worship actually exists I’m thinking Piper is headed for hell on a bobsled for showing such callous lack of love for His creation.

  • Water_Bear

    Not to derail, I largely agree with you, but “New Atheists” (I prefer Militant Atheist personally) don’t actually believe in a deity, tyrannical or no. After all, then we would be Misotheists. That “cosmic bully” stuff is just a talking point to draw attention to the less socially acceptable parts of people’s holybooks to maybe get a little self-examination going.

  • Becca Stareyes

    Fair enough, other lori — in my mental image it was more about who took the rear as the two of them run and call the cops.  And, yeah, if Jason (who I called John, showing I’m bad with names) did it without thinking, then yeah: people do irrational things when people they care about are in danger, because we humans aren’t very good at acting logically under pressure.

    But Jason shouldn’t be obligated to do so out of ‘manhood’ any more than Sara should be obligated to not do so out of ‘womanhood’.  Especially in a situation where any ‘self-sacrifice’ is based on reactions (trained or untrained) rather than even the consideration of ‘not Jason/Sara!’.  (I fully expect I’d freeze up, regardless of how much I cared about the person I’m with, for instance.  Should I be able to act, I will be pleasantly surprised.) 

  • Carstonio

    Piper apparently imagines himself as Siegfried rescuing Brynhild from the flames and being rewarded with several nights of wild gratitude sex. 

  • http://www.jasonknox.weebly.com jasonknox

    John Piper is giving a hypothetical situation, of course the two should run if they are able. He is making a circumstance with artificial restraints to give us a thought experiment and make a point.  He didn’t create an allegory in which every element in the story has an equivalent. When Jesus tells the story about the guy who bugs his neighbor at night so much that eventually the neighbor helps him out just to shut him up.  Jesus isn’t trying to make a point about God being like the short tempered neighbor, he’s making a point about the guy and how we should pray. Don’t misread Jesus and write a blog saying “Jesus believes that God is cranky and only helps you to not be annoyed.”
    To assume that Piper would have the woman stand there and do nothing while her hero fights the knife guy says more about you than it does about John Piper. That’s not the point of the thought experiment. His point is that for the man to stand idly by is cowardice. Are we really going to argue with that? For the woman to act a helpmate means, particularly if she is a trained martial artist, fighting the guy as well. Piper wouldn’t say that if she was alone that it would be improper for her to fight and he isn’t saying that it would be improper to have her join in. He doesn’t think that a female trained martial shouldn’t be allowed to defend herself. Don’t dissect his example as an allegory – that is an unfair way to misrepresent him. If I offer to hold a door for a woman or carry a heavy box for her it doesn’t mean that I assume that she is incapable of doing that and it doesn’t mean that I believe she shouldn’t be allowed to do that. When I ask, “Would you like me to carry that for you?” please don’t hear “My ego would be hurt if you don’t submit to me.”In writing this John Piper was seeking to condemn male cowardice and argue that men ought to be willing to lay down their lives for women. He is not saying less than that and he is not saying more than that. Don’t hear what he is not saying. 

  • http://twitter.com/FearlessSon FearlessSon

    Suppose, I said, a couple of you students, Jason and Sarah, were walking to McDonald’s after dark. And suppose a man with a knife jumped out of the bushes and threatened you. And suppose Jason knows that Sarah has a black belt in karate and could probably disarm the assailant better than he could. Should he step back and tell her to do it? No. He should step in front of her and be ready to lay down his life to protect her, irrespective of competency. It is written on his soul. That is what manhood does.
    And collectively that is what society does — unless the men have all been emasculated by the suicidal songs of egalitarian folly.

    And with that, Jason removes himself from the breeding pool forthwith, making the next generation of society incrimentally less stupid.  

    Thank you Jason, your ego-driven sacrifice has improved those who remain alive, and for that we salute you.  

  • frazer

    So then why is egalitarianism “folly” and “suicidal”? In the example Piper gives, his preferred solution–that the untrained guy jump in front of the trained woman to deal with the bad guy–is what is suicidal.

  • http://dpolicar.livejournal.com/ Dave

     > Don’t hear what he is not saying.

    He didn’t say that, when Jason and Sarah are attacked, Jason and Sarah should both fight. That’s your addition to his text. Instead, he said that Jason should step in front of Sarah because that “is what manhood does”.

    I think we’re hearing exactly what he’s saying.

  • http://thatbeerguy.blogspot.com Chris Doggett

    To assume that Piper would have the woman stand there and do nothing while her hero fights the knife guy says more about you than it does about John Piper. That’s not the point of the thought experiment. His point is that for the man to stand idly by is cowardice. Are we really going to argue with that?

    Yes.

    If that’s his point, then he is wrong! To stand idly by while a more competent, capable person resolves a problem is wisdom, not cowardice. To realize when one’s efforts would not add, and might possibly subtract from resolution is humility; to insist on helping even when poorly equipped to do so is pride and vanity.

     If I offer to hold a door for a woman or carry a heavy box for her it doesn’t mean that I assume that she is incapable of doing that and it doesn’t mean that I believe she shouldn’t be allowed to do that.

    No. It means you think, all other things being equal, that she simply should not do such things.  
    You could have given an example of offering to hold a door for a person or carry a heavy box for someone, but since you chose gendered language, it means when it comes to women carrying heavy boxes, you do believe if a man and woman are present, the man is expected to carry the heavy box, or at least expected to ask to carry it. Even if the man is Steven Hawking, and the woman is Serena Williams. 

  • http://www.jasonknox.weebly.com jasonknox

    frazer,
    Piper isn’t saying “be suicidal and foolish” –  he is saying don’t be a coward. There is a difference.  Piper isn’t forbidding the woman to act – he is forbidding the man to not act. I imagine that in Piper’s “preferred solution” the man doesn’t die either, but the man does refuse to allow the woman to die in his place. Is that so controversial? 

  • http://thatbeerguy.blogspot.com Chris Doggett

     Piper isn’t forbidding the woman to act – he is forbidding the man to not act.

    Actually, he is telling the man to forbid the woman from acting:
    Should he step back and tell her to do it? No. >He should step in front of her and be ready to lay down his life to protect her

  • Lori

     

     

    His point is that for the man to
    stand idly by is cowardice.

    No, it’s really not. You need to go back and read his quote again.

    Are we really going to argue with that? 

    Even assuming that’s what Piper was saying, which it’s not, the answer would still be that yes, we are going to argue with it. Because it’s stupid.

    For the woman to act a helpmate

    There’s a real big part of your problem, right there.

     

    He doesn’t think that a female trained martial shouldn’t be allowed to defend
    herself.  

    No, he just thinks that a man who knows full well that she’s more equipped to
    deal with the situation at hand should nevertheless get in her way and attempt
    to do it. Because penis, that’s why.

     

     If I offer to hold a door for a woman or carry a heavy box for her it
    doesn’t mean that I assume that she is incapable of doing that and it doesn’t
    mean that I believe she shouldn’t be allowed to do that.  
     

    It’s fine for you to offer. It’s not fine for you to grab the box out
    of the woman’s hands because it’s written in your soul to carry boxes for women.

    In writing this John Piper was seeking to condemn male cowardice

    Allowing the best qualified person to handle a situation is not cowardice. It’s smart.  See
    above re: yes, I am arguing with you about this.

    and argue that men ought to be willing to lay down their lives for women.

    Why?

    No really, why? Why is it only the man’s job to die? Why is a man’s worth
    measured by his willingness to die, even when doing so is actually pointless and unnecessary? Because, penis? 

    He is not saying less than that and he is not saying more than that. Don’t hear
    what he is not saying.

    We’re hearing him just fine. He’s spouting gender essentialist crap that’s
    insulting to men and to women. In attempting to defend him you’re doing the
    same.

  • MikeJ

    Happily, within moments of stepping in front of her, Jason is going to be dead, and then  Sarah is going to kick the attacker’s ass, and then she won’t be stuck with a jackass.

  • Akallabeth

    In that he’s assigning roles in an emergency based on gender rather than any relevant attribute, yes, it is controversial (by which I mean “stupid”). 

  • Greenygal

    For the woman to act a helpmate means, particularly if she is a trained
    martial artist, fighting the guy as well. Piper wouldn’t say that if she
    was alone that it would be improper for her to fight and he isn’t
    saying that it would be improper to have her join in.

    Piper’s article begins with these lines:

    “If I were the last man on the planet to think so, I would want the honor
    of saying no woman should go before me into combat to defend my
    country. A man who endorses women in combat is not pro-woman; he’s a wimp. He should be ashamed.”

    So.  Women should not be in combat.  Any man who thinks it’s okay for women to be in combat should be ashamed of himself.

    Explain to me how this is Piper saying that Sarah ought to join in the fight, because I would be interested to hear it.

  • Albanaeon

    Soooo… we are simply misreading phrases like “what manhood does” and “a society were men are emasculated” in conjuncture with a story on how a real man is suicidally stupid and can’t just get out of the way more competent woman.

    I think you are the more likely to be reading things into this sad little anecdote than we…

  • http://www.jasonknox.weebly.com jasonknox

    Chris,
    both in the knife fight example and with my box carrying example you are extrapolating beyond my intentions. I think you are right – wisdom does consider circumstances.

    In a heavy box carrying example if all other things are equal then I don’t believe that she simply should not do such things. What about the other 99 times out of a hundred in which I’m not there? Of course women can and should carry boxes. However, if all things are being equal I would offer  to carry it to do something nice for her. If she refused that would really be ok. I would just offer to lay down my preferences for her – is that so bad?

    I very much disagree that Jason attacking first would not add and possibly subtract from the “problem” of having your life threatened by a knife guy. I imagine Sarah would be much more safe and capable of finally dispatching of the  knife guy if Jason is at least distracting him. I imagine Jason being at least maniacal enough to give Sarah enough time to best assess the situation and maybe knock the knife away or get a good swift kick to the head while the attacker is focusing on Jason. That really seems to be the best solution – far better than Jason stepping back and saying  “all you!”

  • MikeJ

    What if instead of a black belt, Sarah had a gun? They’re really the same thing. In both cases, one person is armed and the other person isn’t.  In one case the person is armed with competence, in the other she;s armed with a gun.

    I can’t imagine a rightwinger not getting a hard on from a little bangbangshootshoot. Of course he’s going to love it when Sarah unloads into some swarthy attacker.

  • Lori

    he is forbidding the man to not act.  

    First of all Piper has no authority to forbid anyone to do anything.

    Second, forbidding someone not to act when acting would be stupid, vain and suicidal is the wrong thing to do. To the extent that people follow Piper’s instructions they are doing the wrong thing.

     

    Is that so controversial?    

    It’s not controversial, it’s dumb.

  • http://dpolicar.livejournal.com/ Dave

    > Piper isn’t saying “be suicidal and foolish”

    He also describes the alternatives to his model of society — for example, an alternative in which the better-trained member of the pair fights the assailant while the lesser-trained member acts as her “helpmeet”, and their gender doesn’t matter — as one in which “the men have all
    been emasculated by the suicidal songs of egalitarian folly”. Which is what frazer was quoting.

    So, to repeat frazer’s question: what’s suicidal about such an egalitarian, gender-blind approach? What makes it folly?

  • Tehanu

    “unless the men have all been emasculated by the suicidal songs of egalitarian folly”

    Uh, how is it NOT suicidal to jump in front of the person who is better able to protect both you and herself and prevent her from doing it?  Oh right, because penis, that’s why.  Riiiiight.

  • spinetingler

    Jason would best be of help by circling 180 degrees around the other side of the attacker, distracting the attackers attention allowing Sara an opening to wreak havoc, probably in the genital and knee area.

  • Lori

     

    I very much disagree that Jason attacking first would not add and
    possibly subtract from the “problem” of having your life threatened by a
    knife guy. I imagine Sarah would be much more safe and capable of
    finally dispatching of the  knife guy if Jason is at least distracting
    him. I imagine Jason being at least maniacal enough to give Sarah enough
    time to best assess the situation and maybe knock the knife away or get
    a good swift kick to the head while the attacker is focusing on Jason.
    That really seems to be the best solution – far better than Jason
    stepping back and saying  “all you!”   

    And with this you demonstrate that you don’t know any more about defending against a knife-wielding attacker than Jason does. If anything remotely like this ever happens to you please, for the love of good sense and the safety of all concerned, step aside and say “all you” to the person who actually knows what they’re doing. Even if that person doesn’t have a penis.

  • Worthless Beast

    As an asexual, I really *despise* the use of the “breeding pool” and one’s potential participation therein as a measure of worth. 

    Just throwing that out there.  (And you don’t have to listen to me, look at my username).

  • http://www.jasonknox.weebly.com jasonknox

    greenygal,
    When I wrote “for the woman to act as a helpmate means…” I was using my imagination to fill in the gaps of Piper’s article – I don’t believe that Piper was saying anything either way about what the woman ought to do or not do. I don’t think Piper is talking about Sarah at all.  I think Piper was using one situation to make one point and it looked to me as though people were using their imaginations to assume negative things about him. I wanted to propose alternatives. 

    I think Piper’s main point is not “women serving in combat is intrinsically bad” but that “men abdicating their roles and their duty to die for others when called upon is intrinsically bad.” It seems to me that Piper believes that women serving in combat is the symptom and the disease is “men acting cowardly.” I don’t imagine he is mad at the women serving, I think he is mad that men would stand by idly making it necessary for women to serve. 

  • Albanaeon

    Wow.  You don’t know much about martial arts.  Trust me as a 20 year martial artist, someone untrained, acting entirely on ego (a form of cowardice in this case) is going to be worse than useless in this case.  In all likelihood, Jason gets stabbed and Sarah now has to know emergency treatments.  Or even worse, Jason gets completely in Sarah’s way and the attacker gets both of them.

  • Albanaeon

    Wow.  You don’t know much about martial arts.  Trust me as a 20 year martial artist, someone untrained, acting entirely on ego (a form of cowardice in this case) is going to be worse than useless in this case.  In all likelihood, Jason gets stabbed and Sarah now has to know emergency treatments.  Or even worse, Jason gets completely in Sarah’s way and the attacker gets both of them.

  • J_Enigma23

    Kid 1: “hey, you got your misandry in my misogyny!”
    Kid 2: “No, you got your misogyny in my misandry!”
    Narrator: Two shitty tastes, now together in one convenient package!
    Kid 1: “Wow… I can’t imagine having one without having the other, now! This is awesome in the crappiest way possible!”

    The Pipsqueak Piper babbled: “- unless the men have all been emasculated by the suicidal songs of egalitarian folly”

    So, hang on. You’re telling me to jump out in front of a guy with a knife, and then you turn right back around and criticize egalitarianism as suicide, using suicide as a bad thing when that’s basically what you just told me to do?

    If I see a guy with a knife, I’m going to try and figure out what the hell they want and try to talk my way out of the problem as fast as I can.

    Really, I’m surprised he’s not attacking Sarah as a ball-bashing man-hating femnazi harpy since she knows Karate while whimpy old Jason over there doesn’t. After all, wimminz shouldn’t be allowed to know that stuff, since it clearly makes them masculine and that’d be a bad thing.

    Hey, Piper, here’s an idea: let people do what they do best, irrespective of gender.

  • Lori

    I think it’s worth noting that Piper’s biography doesn’t mention anything about military service.  I guess it wasn’t cowardly not to serve when there were no women in combat roles, but now it is. Is he calling for mass enlistment or bringing back the draft? I’m guessing he’s not.

    I also think it’s worth noting that he’s 67 years old and well past the point of being able, never mind expected, to serve in combat instead of a woman.

    IOW, same old, same old—an old man spouting lies in order to get young men to die for the old man’s belief’s.

  • spinetingler

     Despite several efforts, I’ve found that it’s very difficult to do anything like “breeding” (even if we’re just practicing) in a pool.

  • spinetingler

     Despite several efforts, I’ve found that it’s very difficult to do anything like “breeding” (even if we’re just practicing) in a pool.

  • The_L1985

     Are you reading the same passage we’re reading?  Because Jason can’t possibly step in front of Sarah in that scenario without getting in her way and thus preventing her from acting.  Bear in mind that this is part of an article about Why Women Should Never, Ever Fight.

    Personally, I prefer the solution that minimizes the chance of either innocent party being harmed, and in this case, that means Jason, as an untrained bystander, should stand back and let the person with the black belt handle things.

    Next, you’ll tell me that it’s wrong that sometimes I, a woman, hold the door for people of either sex.  Because I was taught that it is polite for people to hold the door for people.  Sometimes I hold the door for others; sometimes the door is held for me.  But I’m not nearly stupid enough to sit there and insist that the nearest male must open the door for me when I’ve got a perfectly good pair of hands.

    Piper’s argument is that any course of action that leads to a woman fighting is wrong.  The Jason/Sarah scenario appears in the context of an article that says that women shouldn’t engage in combat, even if they’re properly trained for it.  Piper honestly believes that even if the only people trained for combat were female, only untrained men should ever, ever, EVER be allowed to fight.  Because people with vaginas are not allowed to do anything physical, ever, clearly.

  • The_L1985

     Are you reading the same passage we’re reading?  Because Jason can’t possibly step in front of Sarah in that scenario without getting in her way and thus preventing her from acting.  Bear in mind that this is part of an article about Why Women Should Never, Ever Fight.

    Personally, I prefer the solution that minimizes the chance of either innocent party being harmed, and in this case, that means Jason, as an untrained bystander, should stand back and let the person with the black belt handle things.

    Next, you’ll tell me that it’s wrong that sometimes I, a woman, hold the door for people of either sex.  Because I was taught that it is polite for people to hold the door for people.  Sometimes I hold the door for others; sometimes the door is held for me.  But I’m not nearly stupid enough to sit there and insist that the nearest male must open the door for me when I’ve got a perfectly good pair of hands.

    Piper’s argument is that any course of action that leads to a woman fighting is wrong.  The Jason/Sarah scenario appears in the context of an article that says that women shouldn’t engage in combat, even if they’re properly trained for it.  Piper honestly believes that even if the only people trained for combat were female, only untrained men should ever, ever, EVER be allowed to fight.  Because people with vaginas are not allowed to do anything physical, ever, clearly.

  • Worthless Beast

    I think most of us are missing the *real* solution to this problem:   Jason and Sarah exchange worried looks, start running – to a well-lit and populated area if they can.  Also, one of them pulls the cell phone from their pocket (if they have one, most do – though I forget mine and leave it at home sometimes) and dial frickin’ 911.  Dealing with a crazy guy with a knife?  That’s a cop’s job.  Said cop can be any gender.  I don’t think either Jason or Sarah are going to care.

  • The_L1985

      Are you reading the same passage we’re reading?  Because Jason can’t possibly step in front of Sarah in that scenario without getting in her way and thus preventing her from acting.  Bear in mind that this is part of an article about Why Women Should Never, Ever Fight.

    Personally, I prefer the solution that minimizes the chance of either innocent party being harmed, and in this case, that means Jason, as an untrained bystander, should stand back and let the person with the black belt handle things.

    Next, you’ll tell me that it’s wrong that sometimes I, a woman, hold the door for people of either sex.  Because I was taught that it is polite for people to hold the door for people.  Sometimes I hold the door for others; sometimes the door is held for me.  But I’m not nearly stupid enough to sit there and insist that the nearest male must open the door for me when I’ve got a perfectly good pair of hands.

    Piper’s argument is that any course of action that leads to a woman fighting is wrong.  The Jason/Sarah scenario appears in the context of an article that says that women shouldn’t engage in combat, even if they’re properly trained for it.  Piper honestly believes that even if the only people trained for combat were female, only untrained men should ever, ever, EVER be allowed to fight.  Because people with vaginas are not allowed to do anything physical, ever, clearly.

  • SisterCoyote

    My sister and I just went out to dinner with our brother, and I bit my tongue the entire night while his friend, who I gather is also his boss, acted the Traditional And Slightly Pervy Old Dude part, complete with sexism and “Respect your elders,” and it was mildly annoying, but well worth the opportunity to sit down and enjoy a night with my siblings.

    So reading this is a breath of fresh air. The person who holds the door is the person who gets there first. The person who pays is the person who can afford to (or split the tab! Nothin’ unchivalrous about that!), or the person whose turn it is, or, as with my boyfriend and I, the person who is quicker/sneakier about getting their wallet out. The person who fights off an attacker IS THE PERSON WHO IS CAPABLE OF DOING SO.

    You don’t call in A Man to fix a computer, you call in someone who knows how to fix computers. Same goes for cars! Plumbing! Lighting fixtures! Are these also fields in which we should make sure male egos are satiated, regardless of competency? What a bloody moron.

    (Not even going to bother with the concern troll. Just… no.)

  • The_L1985

    “I was using my imagination to fill in the gaps of Piper’s article”

    Pity. One quick click of a hyperlink and you could have just read the damn article like I (and probably several other people) did.

    Again, the article itself is one against women serving in combat.  The entire article is, in fact, “women serving in combat is intrinsically bad because in Piper’s version of Christianity men and women should never be allowed outside of very rigid gender roles.”

  • SisterCoyote

     I would be totally okay with breaking down all these arguments, in the future, down to “What, he has to do that? Why? Because, penis?”

    Since that is, after all, what they tend to be saying.

  • Lori

     

    I think Piper’s main point is not “women serving in combat is
    intrinsically bad” but that “men abdicating their roles and their duty
    to die for others when called upon is intrinsically bad.” It seems to me
    that Piper believes that women serving in combat is the symptom and the
    disease is “men acting cowardly.” I don’t imagine he is mad at the
    women serving, I think he is mad that men would stand by idly making
    it necessary for women to serve. 

    You defense just keeps getting more and more ridiculous. You need to step back and think about what you’re saying.

    There is no good reason to think that dying in combat is the duty and role of men. Further more, the change in the combat status of women is not due to any abdication of penis-defined duty. Women are not going to serve in combat because we’ve run out of male meat to feed into the grinder. They’re going to serve in combat roles because they wish to do so and are qualified to do so. That’s the essense of an all-volunteer force. Those who choose to serve do so, in the capacity that is needed and which they are able to fulfill.

    Again I ask, is Piper calling for mass enlistment or a return to the draft? I don’t see any indication that he is. That tells me that he’s mad about women serving and is trying to manipulate the manhood myth in order to shame people into making that stop.

  • The_L1985

     It works for every stupid sexist argument, too!

    “Men can’t stop themselves from raping, because PENIS!”

    “All men know how to perform complicated mechanical repairs, because PENIS!”

    “Men should always be paid more than women for doing the exact same work, because PENIS!”

  • cyllan

    the man does refuse to allow the woman to die in his place. Is that so controversial?

    Yes.

    I am going to be cranky if someone Bravely Sacrifices Themselves for me.  I’m going to be really fucking furious if they do so while they are throwing their life away for something that I could have resolved.  They are making their death my responsibility, and…fuck that noise.

    Jason, as someone untrained, is best off screaming for help and calling 911 on his cellphone.  Sarah, as someone trained, is best off screaming for help and calling 911 on her cellphone. If it comes down to a knife-fight, you will want emergency responders there as soon as humanly possible. 

    As for the carrying boxes and opening doors:  it is polite and reasonable to offer to help out.  If I see someone with a heavy box, I am likely to offer assistance.  I will open doors for people who are behind me. Note the gender neutral terms here; they are important.  If you are only offering to help women with heavy boxes, you are not a gentleman; you are an ass.

  • http://thatbeerguy.blogspot.com Chris Doggett

    See, now you’re just trolling.  “maniacal”? Really? 

    >you are extrapolating beyond my intentions. 

    No, Trolly McTrollerson, you are extrapolating far beyond Piper’s original argument.

     Jason knows that Sarah has a black belt in karate and could probably disarm the assailant better than he could.
    That? That’s in Piper’s piece.  Jason’s “maniacal” efforts? An extrapolation.

    I very much disagree that Jason attacking first would not add and possibly subtract from the “problem” of having your life threatened by a knife guy. 

    Jason attacking first means Jason is at real risk of being stabbed, a risk that does not exist if Jason does not engage the attacker.

    I imagine Sarah would be much more safe and capable of finally dispatching of the  knife guy if Jason is at least distracting him. 

    You have shown yourself quite capable of imaging all sorts of things that comfort you and support your beliefs. That does not legitimize such notions. 

    You’re also moving the goalposts, another time honor troll maneuver. Piper isn’t arguing that Jason should “distract” the attacker. He’s arguing that Jason should sacrifice himself if necessary before Sarah should be allowed to act. 

    Frankly, it’s a little embarrassing to see someone argue that a black belt martial artist would be more “capable” because someone was “distracting” their opponent in some vague, undefined way. 

    I imagine Jason being at least maniacal enough to give Sarah enough time to best assess the situation

    Again, you show a great capacity of imagination when it suits your preconceived positions. Tell me, do you imagine Jason (with no martial arts training to speak of, no special note for his physical fitness or health) getting stabbed in this scenario? 

    As a thought experiment, Mr. Lives-Under-A-Bridge, would you make the same argument if Jason is the black belt, and Sarah is not? Would you argue that Sarah should put herself in front of Jason, and try to “maniacally distract” the knife wielder? 

  • Lori

    Penis. It’s magic.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X