• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Meat Why Men Need a Gang!

PeteR

PeteR

Moderator
Staff member
Real Person
Male
While I suppose I could put this in the Gentlmen's section, I thought some of the ladies may want to chime in on the topic/article.

More than once, I've shared links to excellent Eric Conn articles or some of his Hard Men podcasts. Here is yet another excellent well articulated article worthy of your consideration: https://ericconn.com/why-men-need-a-gang/

Highly recommended!
 
Thank you for sharing, and it is a big deal. . . but as this is a discussion post I'd like to raise two points for discussion. First, in the heartland and in the (real) west independence is a huge cultural value. "I can do it myself." My sons and I have had to butcher cattle in the field . . . but I figured "we can do it ourselves." Sometimes because it's the middle of the night . . . because we don't want to put anybody out, but just as often there isn't anybody I really trust to be there when there's real work to be done. So, in short how do we get over our "independence" and how do we find guys who will "man up"?
 
It was an exceptional podcast! My guys listened during breakfast the other day and I sure liked what I heard.

I laughed out loud at him likening traditional churches men's ministry to gay men's group therapy sessions! :p
 
Joleneakamama said:
It was an exceptional podcast! My guys listened during breakfast the other day and I sure liked what I heard.

I laughed out loud at him likening traditional churches men's ministry to gay men's group therapy sessions! :p
Click to expand...
I just noticed this morning that he has a companion podcast to go with the blog post... Going to listen to it on the road. I do like most of his podcasts. He's engaging, honest, funny, and seriously patriarchal!!
 
Now I see it. Thanks.

It is an interesting topic to contemplate. Should me be individualists or collectivists? As collectivists mass against individuals, it is easy to see how individualists would lose such a fight, yet the Constitution was based on the idea of protection of individual rights. On the Last Day, we will be judged individually. Collectivism ascribes merit or blame to the individual based on the collective that he associates with -- which is very unjust. To defeat collectivism, must individuals collectivize at least temporarily? Seems to make sense.
 
Voluntary collectivism based on 80% shared values, rather than immutable characteristics or nationality, seems to me to be a solid compromise. A congregation is a collection of believers who agree enough to worship together, but each individual has their own walk with God.
 
NationBuilder1 said:
Now I see it. Thanks.

It is an interesting topic to contemplate. Should me be individualists or collectivists? As collectivists mass against individuals, it is easy to see how individualists would lose such a fight, yet the Constitution was based on the idea of protection of individual rights. On the Last Day, we will be judged individually. Collectivism ascribes merit or blame to the individual based on the collective that he associates with -- which is very unjust. To defeat collectivism, must individuals collectivize at least temporarily? Seems to make sense.
Click to expand...
There is a balance. Being a nation builder demands at least some collectivism... Israel, as a patriarchal, tribal, family had 'gang cohesion' but usually the gang was brothers, uncles, cousins, etc... The family/clan unit.

BTW, please drop a brief introduction in the Introductions board. Shalom!
 
Collectivism ascribes merit or blame to the individual based on the collective that he associates with -- which is very unjust.
Click to expand...

I probably should have said " -- which is not necessarily just." Frankly, people can be generally judged by the company they keep.

@PeteR, you wrote, "please drop a brief introduction in the Introductions board." I will work on that.
 
NationBuilder1 said:
Should me be individualists or collectivists?
Click to expand...
Both.

Socialism / collectivism is the natural way people relate to each other within a family, tribe or "gang".

Individualism / capitalism is the natural way people relate to those outside the family / tribe / gang.

Both are an important part of life. Both cause serious problems when applied in the wrong places. If socialism is imposed by a government, forcing people to relate to those outside their gang using socialism, a country is destroyed. On the other hand, if people relate to everybody using individualism, they have no gang at all and no support network.

Don't be an individualist or a collectivist. Be well rounded enough to see both simply as tools, and know how to apply them, rather than making one or the other an aspect of your own identity.
 
NationBuilder1 said:
Should we be individualists or collectivists?
Click to expand...
FollowingHim said:
Both.

Socialism / collectivism is the natural way people relate to each other within a family, tribe or "gang".

Individualism / capitalism is the natural way people relate to those outside the family / tribe / gang.
Click to expand...
Now here I have a citation, because I can't forget it: Henry Louis Morgan's Ancient Society, which was considered the bible of sociology before the postmodernists took over in the early 1960s.

In it he dispels the myth that tribes are internally socialistic. Instead, they are almost universally the most decentralized laissez faire form of 'government,' with decisions preferably being made at the lowest rungs of the ladder as possible -- and members are predominantly treated based on merit.

Both statism and postmodernism have purposefully distorted the meaning of 'tribe' and 'tribalism' for the purpose of treating extended family structures as bogeymen.
 
In The Way of Men, Jack Donovan makes a clear argument that among men in a gang or clan, each man must earn his place and continually compete for it. NOBODY gives security or support to a man that can't add value or pull his weight. Women can receive such protection, but the man who can't fight or hunt is quickly reduced to menial support tasks or shuffled out of the gang. There is no room for slackers.

Just hang with a group of men for an afternoon, or attend a BibFam retreat and notice the continual jockeying for position and sharp barbs exchanged. These aren't men being mean or uncouth, these are real men in their natural environment wrestling/jousting whether verbally or physically. Under it all is a subconscious, or even conscious, proving to other men of one's value. Pecking orders are developed and respect is earned. Mettle is tested, spines/skin are hardened.

There is collectivism, but that is for the women and children, for the survival if the tribe. Any collectivism among the men is only for the purpose of greater good and that cooperation is led by the strongest individuals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top