User:BenBugajski/sandbox

South African masculist evangelical movements

In the wake of the abolition of apartheid, South Africa has seen a resurgence of masculist Christian evangelical groups, led by two complementary men's and women's movements, the Mighty Men movement and the Worthy Women movement. The Mighty Men movement harkens back to the Victorian idea of Muscular Christianity and the movement does not lead discussions about institutionalized racism. Feminist scholars argue that their lack of attention to women's rights and their historical struggle with racial equality makes the movement dangerous to women and the stability of the country. Scholar Miranda Pillay argues that the Mighty Men movement has gained traction because they argue that gender equality is incompatible with Christian values and because the patriarchy has gained "hyper-normative status," thus delegitimizing any other challenging claims to power.

The Worthy Women movement supports the Mighty Men movement because it advocates formenism, which subscribes to the belief in the inherent superiority of men over women, however it is propagated for and by women. The leader of the movement, Gretha Wiid, aims to restore order in South Africa by restoring order in the family, or making women subservient to men. She blames the country's disorder on the liberation of women. Reasons offered for her seemingly paradoxical success include that she claims that God created the gender hierarchy but that women are no less valuable than men and that the restoration of the traditional gender roles relieves existential anxiety in post-apartheid South Africa.

Their organizational model has been mimicked by other religious movements, like the Catholic men's movement.

Feminism, Manhood, and Race

Feminism

The National Organization for Women (NOW), an American feminist organization, has expressed the view that the Promise Keepers pose a threat to women's rights. NOW alleges that the group encourages inequality within marriages and teaches a doctrine of male superiority. According to Amy Schindler, "the discourse of masculinity found within conservative religious movements, such as the Promise Keepers and the Victorian era movement 'muscular Christianity,' is inherently political. Any masculinity project aimed at restoring or reclaiming a 'traditional' male role for privileged white, heterosexual males has a political impact within the tapestry of class, race, and gender power." Academic Browyn Kara Conrad argues that the organization reproduces problematic sexual scripts such as the Madonna/whore view of female sexuality and a view of the male sex drive as uncontrollable. Other scholars argue that, despite their initial appearance to be pro-feminist, the Promise Keepers build upon patriarchal assumptions, including have the man as the actor in the family, church, and world, and that they expect women to be passively dependent. The group was also criticized for doctrinal compromises and inconsistent doctrines. Raymond Hartwig, president of the South Dakota district of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, commented: "They use the Bible in a very simplistic form, as a springboard to jump into the law."

Manhood

The organization places particular emphasis on godly manhood, with an emphasis on fatherhood. John Bartkowski sees Promise Keepers' leadership evoking two types of manhood: first, is an essentialist appeal to gender difference advocated by Edwin Louis Cole that emphasizes aggression, strength, and rationality; second, is Gary Oliver's "expressive manhood," which says that all of the traits now traditionally attributed to women were practiced by Jesus, and that men should re-connect with their sensitive side. When it comes to fatherhood, even if it is good they promote it, the organization tends to be more conservative, and it still reproduces heterosexist, male power in the family.

Race

Patrick Glynn notes that the Promise Keepers succeed in in racial reconciliation where politics has seemed to fail. Scholar Siphiwe Dude notes that the organization has open discussions of race that promote racial reconciliation. L. Dean Allen finds that while the organizations' leaders primarily claim that Satan is responsible for fostering racism in individuals and that the best way to counter racism is for people to personally repent and go to confession, PK participants see racism as a more multifaceted issue, citing historical animosity, economic differences, and racial fear. Further, while both leaders and participants see forming relationships with members of other races as important to battling racism, participants do not see PK events as valuable in developing these relationships. Andrea Smith also notes that race relations between Peace Keepers and Native communities is more open.