Featured Is effeminacy a problem?

Diamond Lady,

There is a difference in a boy playing with dolls and princesses and pretending to be one, IMO. If my son is wearing around a Tutu or my daughter was wearing around a jock strap, I'd try to keep from laughing to hard and then I'd explain how it wasn't appropriate. There is nothing wrong with teaching boys and girls proper cultural norms. And it can be done without being unloving and judgmental. Children need to be taught the differences between men and women with care and love.

 

Here are a few of the statements I find sad in this discussion. Thankfully there are a couple voices of reason around here.

 

You know, I can't help but think of Jacob and Esau in this thread.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew: and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a plain man, dwelling in tents.
28 And Isaac loved Esau, because he did eat of his venison: but Rebekah loved Jacob.
29 And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came from the field, and he was faint:

Esau was a man's man. He was a hunter. You can see him coming in from the hunt, covered in dirt and sweat, some wild animal slung over his shoulder.

What is Jacob doing? He is making soup like a woman.

Who did God favor?

 

Precisely....

 

Luke,

I don't believe there is anything wrong or sinful about a man having more 'feminine' qualities than you. (higher voice, gestures, movements, etc.) Those qualities aren't sin, they are just different from you.

After all, it is intent of the heart that determines wether something is 'sinful,' right?

 

Luke, speak to any educator and they will tell you that what toys a child plays with has absolutely no bearing, whatsoever, on how masculine or rugged a boy will be or how feminine and soft a girl will be.

As for buying Barbies for a boy...no, I wouldn't suggest that at all. But the grandson plays with his sister, and she plays with him...they play with all the toys. We cracked up the day he had Barbie riding on the tank shooting the gun (because there were no boy dolls..he made do with what was available). He's THREE for pete's sake.

Yes, God designed MEN and WOMEN to be different...GROWN men and women. Children are allowed to explore and discover who they are and what they'll be. Not all are going to be hunter gatherers. I love the example one gave here of Esau and Jacob. Esau was the "he man" Jacob was the momma's boy...yet GOD loved and blessed Jacob.

It's really okay to let a child explore different things. Go to the preschool room at church and sit and watch the children playing. I think you'll understand more what I'm saying.

 

I think it depends. He's three. He's about as much a boy as a boy can be...he likes trucks and guns, playing soldiers and cars. He's also got a soft heart and loves his sister. When she played princess so did he. He might have been the prince if we had a prince costume...who knows. If he's still dressing in a crown, tutu and click clack high heels at 5 we'll have a talk, but at 3 I don't think he'd get it. He's not dressing to "be" someone...he's playing with his big sister.

 

I really don't think the issue is as you are saying. When you say, "as beautiful as" and "as rugged as", I take you in the literal sense, in that if a man dresses "as a woman" such that the distinction is confusing, or altogether convincing, then that is what is wrong. Do you personally know people or situations where this is the case? So, to me this would mean that anything less than a man putting on makeup for the purpose of being purposefully and confusingly feminin is not necessarily wrong. For instance, there are situations in which I see no problem with men wearing make-up so long knowing the truth does not /would not cause confusion.

This is the issue, "Would a reasonable person be resonably be confused by the appearance or the behavior?". There are certain situations where a male dressed as a female does not cause confusion to a reasonable person, and vice-versa.

 

Well, if you're gonna do it, do it right.

Good job



Not so good

 

Okay, the first one possibly confusing to me... the second one is obviously male, no confusion.

Hey Winman! That's about as bad as that preacher asking his audience if they can imagine kissing a man! ;-)

 

Yeah, I hear what you are saying. I've got 4 kids myself and I remember those young years. Like I said, I'd probably just laugh about something like this unless this is the way he always dressed or something. I'm not taking that very seriously or anything, but on the serious side, when we look at the bigger picture I do believe our 'absent fathers' make a big difference in this area. Too many boys are being raised without dad.

 

See, Luke, I think you're asking the wrong questions here. It seems you're equating the outward appearance with sin. Sin generates in the heart of man--NOT in his walk, his talk, or his mannerisms.

I think instead of asking whether it's right or wrong, we should be asking WHY this happens, then try to help solve the problem if there is one. While it's true that the inside of man is often reflected by the outside, there are many other valid reasons for what we see. Several of those reasons have been mentioned--lack of a father figure, a gentle, shy personality, a high pitched voice, etc. We as Christians, especially Christian MEN, should be willing to take the young people under our wings and love them and teach them IF we perceive the issue stems from the heart.

It's easy to point fingers and say "that's wrong." It's harder to try to understand and help.

I do think that the media makes it seem more acceptable to be gay. I do not let my children watch tv shows that portray gay people as funny or normal.

 

With such a wide range of genetic features across both genders, I don't think we can make hard and firm statements/rules as to how a "man" should move as opposed to how a gay man might move. For that matter, not all women who are big in stature and heavy in body (notice I did NOT say fat!) can be considered any more gay than the 5' 1" woman who weighs 98 pounds soaking wet. God loves wonderous variety!! Look around.

Now, as to the effeminate boy. My now 17 year son was a sickly child and got knocked out of doing a lot of "manly" stuff when he was 9 and continuing forward almost to today. About the time he turned 11 he created "Stephanie". Stephanie was his evil alter ego and she was very feminine. Son didn't have a smart mouth, but Stephanie did. If something happened in the house, son hadn't done it, Stephanie had broken it but was afraid he'd break a nail if she tried to fix it. Stephanie tried on his sisters shoes and paraded around the house in them. Stephanie had discussions with his older sister about the guys she dated. We occassionally called Stephanie by name. Sadly, Stephanie died somewhere around the time Son turned 14 or so. It was a great loss of sarcasm in our household. And her development didn't make my son one step closer to being gay than taking karate (and winning at sparring) makes my daughters.

Luke, people worry to much about hom*sexuality. Sin is sin. It's not gonna matter one iota more that a child becomes a hom*sexual when he is grown than if he becomes an adulterer. Sin is sin. We all commit them, and we all get forgiven the same way no matter what that sin is. And if we don't get our sins covered under the blood of Christ, it still won't matter what particular sins we commit. We'd be destined for hell simply for saying a cross word. All have sinned, the Bible says. But it doesn't say that those who commit x, y or z are going to be worse off than than those who committed a, b or c. So take a deep breathe and let the children develop into what God would have him to be. You might just be surprised at what God has in store.

 

The first one is male too, it is Jenna Talackova that competed in the Miss Universe pageant in Canada just 2 months ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ueen-kicked-Miss-Universe-Canada-pageant.html

I didn't think I could ever be fooled, but I think this fellow could. The only real giveaway are her (his) feet-- HUGE.

 

If a man acts more feminine than male, I (like many others) automatically think "homosexual". If a woman acts more masculine than feminine, we automatically think "lesbian". For the more "politically correct" people, it would be "gay" for both genders.

I can't speak for other countries, but the US seems to be trying to do away with gender separations and want to make us all "one gender" or "unisex". Someone even came up with (and might have even done it by now) the idea that any gender words should be removed from the Bible. No more "him", "her" or anything like that.

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh: French, perhaps?

 

Honestly, parts of this thread have the tone of a fifth-year boys gym class.

Who decides what is effeminate and what is just different? I don't speak of hair, dress, or intentional behavior of a man trying to pass himself off as a woman. I mean the types of mannerisms, lisps, and interests (clothes or I don't know what else) that would get someone labeled a pansy.

 

How do you define what is effeminate?



I would say the guy on the left appears effeminate, the guy on the right doesn't. Either way, I would never carry a bag like this, it is just the way I was brought up.

So effeminate is open to much personal interpretation. What you consider effeminate I might not, or vice versa.