ManBQ: Overcooking Gender Roles

One of the wonderful things about Facebook is newsfeed, it's like the gossip column of the 21st century in my opinion.  Through the newsfeed on Facebook I became aware of an event that several of my Facebook friends from Azusa Pacific University will be attending, "ManBQ."

Attention all MEN, we're hosting a BBQ this Wednesday night! Come to Trinity lawn for some free CARNE ASADA, conversation, and a chance to talk about Godly sexuality and manhood.  Author Jack Balswick, who spoke in chapel last year, will be sharing his thoughts. The conversation will be candid and you will be able to ask questions. Come out for free food and a great chance to talk about what it means to be a MAN. [Emphasis in original].

Besides being annoyed by the over-masculinized and patriarchal tone of the description, my attention was drawn to the discussion about Godly sexuality and the presence of Jack Balswick.  As I mentioned in my "True Love Waits" post, most discussions about sexuality in evangelical settings are usually misleading and in my opinion, don't offer any valuable advice.  Since this discussion will be within the context of "manhood," I can only imagine how misleading their discussion will be.  When I was a student at Azusa Pacific, I remember discussions about manliness being very depressing.  Often it was a group of guys trying to reassert and reaffirm their masculinity by discussing how they were different than women.  A lot of emphasis was placed on strength and how we were to assert our God-given strength, etc.  I never felt that I could identify with the masculine image that was being presented.  Although I would try and in the end feel like I was a hopeless little nelly.

This discussion will be aided by Jack Balswick, a sociologist from Fuller Theological Seminary that focuses on marriage and family.  The issue of homosexuality is rather troublesome for Balswick, considering his commitment to belief that the Bible is an authoritative text.  He accepts Fuller's strong commitment to heterosexual marriage but at the same time wants to avoid anything that resembles gay-bashing.  The result is language like this, from the book Authentic Human Sexuality: An Integrated Christian Approach (1999):

We acknowledge that some gay Christians may choose to commit themselves to a lifelong, monogamous homosexual union, believing this is God's best for them. They believe that this reflects an authentic sexuality that is congruent for them and their view of Scripture. Even though we hold to the model of a heterosexual, lifelong, monogamous union, our compassion brings us to support all persons as they move in the direction of God's ideal for their lives.

Thus, Balswick has developed a very "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy when it comes to homosexuality; go figure, so has APU and most other Christian colleges and universities.  But I wonder then how Balswick will approach this discussion about Godly sexuality and manhood; Jack and his wife co-author their books together, and they often discuss modern gender roles and lean towards shared roles in some parts, so I wonder if that progressive belief will fit well with a discussion about manhood.

My challenge to my colleagues at Azusa Pacific is to step back from what you think makes you manly, or trying to affirm your masculinity.  Instead affirm just your individuality.  When we try to define what is manly and what is manhood, we create boundaries.  And when someone doesn't fit that definition they are thrown into an identity crisis because they realize that they are out of bounds.  Let us remember that gender roles are socially constructed; therefore, each of us get to decide what it means to be a man or a woman for ourselves.