I Don’t Want to Scare the Girls

In one of the nastier scenes between Edmund and Peter in C.S. Lewis’ The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Edmund lingers behind his sisters to whisper his doubts to his older brother, Peter, “I don’t want to scare the girls, but . . . ” And he explains why this talking Beaver they’re following may be an enemy. It doesn’t seem so nasty perhaps at first, but Edmund captures something enduringly wrong between the sexes.

Edmund is pretending at chivalry to wedge the boys against the girls. He takes shelter in protecting the girls, pretending to have their welfare in mind. Girls might be scared if they knew the truth, so we’ll drop back and form a guys group (small group anyone?) back here to talk about how we know more. I’m not against small groups or gendered groups, but I’ve witnessed the same thing, Betty Friedan explained in 1963 in The Feminine Mystique,

Protectiveness has often muffled the sound of doors closing against women.

That’s why some women refused to step through doors men opened for them.

While, I’m happy to walk through doors that a man may open for me, I see why women’s fear remains intact. Are you really protecting me? Or are you trying to get the upper hand in this situation?And it’s not just men who need to think about this one. Protectiveness is an equal opportunity game. Women are just as guilty as pretending to protect when we really just want the upper hand.

Protectiveness says “You need me to help you out of this jam because you can’t do it on your own.” Now, where is that appropriate? Sometimes it is, sure thing. But, as my therapist says, “Only in cases of life and death do we over function. Then you can get your name in the paper.” Other than time of life and death, we operate within our sphere of responsibility. We don’t protect another adult simply because we want to help. Psychologists call that “over functioning.”

Interesting idea for a dentist in Iowa to consider.

You Can Be Too Sexy For Your Job

Remember the dental hygienist, Melissa Nelson, who was fired for being too attractive for her employer, Dr. James Knight? After Knight’s statements like “If you see a bulge in my pants, you’ll know you’re clothes are too revealing”, his wife, Jeanne Knight caught wind of his attraction to Nelson (who is married with two children) and with the Knight’s minister’s support put an end to Nelson’s 10 years of employment. While Mrs. Knight expressed fear that Nelson’s employment would ruin their marriage, Knight put it more pointedly. He felt certain he would have an affair with Nelson if she continued working with him.

At first you could read this as good protectiveness, a wife wanting to keep her marriage and her poor vulnerable husband intact.

Perhaps Knight’s forgotten that affairs must be mutual. According to Nelson, she felt no attraction to Knight. She never wanted to be sexual with him. His sexual harassment was not wanted or invited. Knight confirmed that in his testimony. Regardless, Nelson was terminated with one month’s severance. Knight continues to have a flourishing dental career where he writes he is “Thankful to have the career he always wanted“.You can see his site and his replacements for Nelson here. Nelson now waits tables at a sports bar. Watch 20/20’s coverage of Nelson’s story. According to public opinion many praised Knight for acting like a man and standing up for his marriage, but you can imagine the outrage as well that Nelsons’ attractiveness was viewed sufficient reason to terminate her as an employee.

I want to focus on the protectiveness of Knight’s wife and his minister. Edmund’s words all over again, “I don’t want to scare my husband, but . . . he might have an affair with his assistant.”

As far as I can tell, Mrs. Knight is not treating her husband as an adult.

Why not consider professional psychological treatment for Knight’s inappropriate fantasy life with Nelson? Since their minister also met with Knight and Nelson during the sacking, it seems Jesus’ words are more appropriate at this time. The things he said about lust and what it can do to destroy a man’s soul, verses which are followed by the suggestion to pluck your eye out, not to pluck the offending women out of your office. Surely, Jesus’ hyperbolic suggestion could have at least been enough to push Knight to professional counseling for his lechery. Charlotte Perkins Gilman once wrote, “Woman should stand besides man as the comrade of his soul, not the servant of his body.” And your action, Mrs. Knight, is only serving your husband’s body. You are removing the opportunity for him to see that he counts it a right to objectify attractive women. And this must stop. Not by removing the attractive object, though. That’s as useful as removing food from a glutton and claiming he’s cured from his addiction.

Due to Knight’s protective wife, will Knight ever face his lasciviousness? Old fashioned words that give me great satisfaction to re-introduce. Lechery, the vice too many male leaders in the church keep nurturing (excusing as red-blooded maleness) unbeknownst to any but the porno sites they frequent.

Lascivious – Given to or expressing lust; lecherous.

Lechery – Excessive interest in or indulgence in sexual activity.

Medieval words that describe what some call “dirty, old men.” Of course, they don’t have to be old, and they don’t have to be male. Women can be lecherous, too.

I would like to talk with Knight and his wife, as well as any who would defend him. Removing the log from your own eye doesn’t mean removing the occasion of temptation. It means you remove the twisted ways you see the world. You refuse to fault those who trigger your sin (Modesty: Covering Up is Not the Answer), and you refuse to let your wife shield your cowardice under the phrase “protecting our marriage.” Can you imagine us doing that for other vices? “Oh, I don’t hire black people because I’m afraid I’ll not listen to them as much as whites. So to avoid the tempation I just don’t hire any minorities?” Why do we allow lust a blank check?

I want to ask pastors who subscribe to this over protective kabash on male-female interaction to stop preaching a false gospel. The very Jesus we claim to follow spent time with attractive, sensual, intelligent, wealthy women. Ask me for a few Biblical examples.

Just this last weekend, a pastor preached on why sexual immorality is the most grievous sin and these ways to protect a “Moral Margin” in your life. Now I’m all about chastity, but some things the pastor said (using James 1:13-15, 1 Cor 6:18-20 and Prov 4:23-26 as his justification) prove to me that he is ignorant that you can flee temptation without fleeing male/female friendship.

He gave this example (reminded me of Billy Graham’s elevator rule) of never having coffee alone with a women. What if you get to the coffee shop and you were supposed to meet a couple and the wife arrives and says, “Oh my husband couldn’t make it?”

You call your wife right away and say, “John couldn’t make it. If you don’t hear from me in an hour come find me.”

Come find me?? Like in that one hour they’ll both be so overcome by temptation that they’ll find a hotel and be making sweet love?

His points

Don’t spend time alone with members of the opposite sex. (Unless it’s your spouse or parent. Parents were mentioned a lot as being safe.)
Keep work relationships professional. (As an aside, he said not to hire attractive people to work with. The unattractive ones are ok.)
Don’t confide in members of the opposite sex. (Don’t share your emotions, hopes, dreams, aspirations, or anything personal/intimate. But do join a life group so you can do this in a safe environment.)
When you feel your heart drifting tell someone.
Let your spouse know what your margins are.

Besides the fact that Jesus broke ALL of these, my immediate red flag is in point #1. Parents are not automatically safe, sexually or otherwise. For a more detailed discussion of these faulty points see my Facebook wall here. Point #2 is precisely where people like Dr. and Mrs. Knight get their gospel fueled self- justification. It seems that Knight’s pastor and this pastor get their information from the same source. Who do you suppose that might be?

Evangelical Christians are damning the good news by preaching a gospel fearful of beauty, suspicious of attractiveness, and filled with dismay when men and women love one another. We have a perfect set up for loneliness (thanks, Jo for this observation). It’s no wonder single men and women, women married to unbelievers, divorced, widowed, service men and women’s spouses, gay Christians who’ve chosen the celibate life find no home in this midst.

Should you be one of the naysayers about male-female friendship, I invite you to begin opening your mind here “Harry and Sally Are Wrong: Two Years Later”

Proper Protection

There is a good kind of protection between the sexes. Proper protection comes from knowing our spouse’s limits, and realizing what a virtuous adult can do, what a disciple of Jesus must do. Finally, you cannot protect someone properly without mutual self-knowledge and self-awareness, a strangely rare virtue these days. It’s easy to notice when it’s missing. You’ll see it by the lack of hospitality in someone’s eyes. They don’t want to be seen.

Last summer, I watched my husband pummeled by insults and false accusations. In that moment, I knew that despite my husband’s stellar memory, his engine was stalling. For when Dale is verbally attacked, his mind goes blank and he freezes.

I’m different, when I’m pummeled my mind grows sharper, quicker. I knew the accusations were inaccurate. That was a moment I could have properly protected him. But, sadly enough, the man in charge of the showdown had effectively muzzled me from speaking. To speak now, he said, “Is proving you don’t think your husband is strong enough to handle this.” In retrospect, I see how wrong he was. How he was using an accusation of over-protectiveness to keep me from honoring my marriage vows and partnering with Dale.

Proper protectiveness knows what our spouse can do as a virtuous disciple of Jesus. I know, no matter the therapy and personal soul care, my husband will not sprout the ability to think on his feet like I can. That is quite different from believing and expecting my husband, as Mrs. Knight should have expected from her husband, to notice when lechery forms a safe nest in his groins. Refusing to lust is something men (and women) must face as disciples of Jesus. But getting better at shooting from the hip or thinking on your feet is not. There is no place Jesus faults a man for forgetting his facts in the heat of battle.

But Jesus severely faults those who objectify those who are attractive to them. It is our eyes, Jesus hyperbolically suggests, we pluck out. Not the woman (or man’s) presence. More on my battle with lust here.

A Cultural Problem

Americans, on the right and the left, enjoy the national past time of overprotecting our neighbors.

Sometime, try to make a list of all the things our culture (church and secular) do under the guise of protecting or helping, that often prevent those we claim to be helping from ever growing up to think, from every being adults that feel, desire, steward their bodies and souls, their humanity, as Jesus would.