• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Is effeminacy a problem?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This is how Webster defines the word "effeminate."

: having feminine qualities untypical of a man : not manly in appearance or manner

The dictionary recognizes that there is a MANNER which is "untypical of a man"

So does most of the rest of the world.

Anybody who pretends that Bruno's mannerisms are perfectly manly in any normal culture on EARTH has their head in the sand.

It's as simple as that.

I agree with your definition and that varies from culture to culture, from era to era.

Have I said that Bruno's mannerisms are manly? No. I doubt they are his natural mannerisms. He is making a living with them.

You opened this as a general thread. Are you now trying to restrict it to just Bruno? That is an entirely different thread.

You question was is a mannerism in and of itself sinful. It is not. After all you man exhibit a mannerism that I or someone else might see as effeminate. Does that make that mannerism sinful .... no it does not if it is your natural was of expression.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
I agree with your definition and that varies from culture to culture, from era to era.


It does not vary. That's why I keep using Bruno. He is recognized by several different cultures as effeminate.

Have I said that Bruno's mannerisms are manly? No. I doubt they are his natural mannerisms. He is making a living with them.

And how does he make that living mocking effeminate men? Watch it, now. BECAUSE EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES HIS MANNERISMS AS EFFEMINATE.

If there were no universal recognition of effeminacy, Sash Cohen could not have made that movie.

You opened this as a general thread. Are you now trying to restrict it to just Bruno? That is an entirely different thread.

I've been ABUNDANTLY clear. Bruno is one example of effeminate mannerism that I have used to answer your questions about what mannerisms are effeminate.


You question was is a mannerism in and of itself sinful.

This is why it is so difficult to talk with you. I never used the word "sinful" on purpose.

I have used an INFINITELY less potent word consistently for nearly 200 posts.

I have said- "Is it okay..."

It makes it very difficult to talk to you when you keep arguing against things I have not even said.

Debate ME. Not where your mind goes when you think about this subject. Not what your mind paints me OUT to be saying. But rather debate what I AM ACTUALLY SAYING, please.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It does not vary. That's why I keep using Bruno. He is recognized by several different cultures as effeminate.



And how does he make that living mocking effeminate men? Watch it, now. BECAUSE EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES HIS MANNERISMS AS EFFEMINATE.

If there were no universal recognition of effeminacy, Sash Cohen could not have made that movie.



I've been ABUNDANTLY clear. Bruno is one example of effeminate mannerism that I have used to answer your questions about what mannerisms are effeminate.




This is why it is so difficult to talk with you. I never used the word "sinful" on purpose.

I have used an INFINITELY less potent word consistently for nearly 200 posts.

I have said- "Is it okay..."

It makes it very difficult to talk to you when you keep arguing against things I have not even said.

Debate ME. Not where your mind goes when you think about this subject. Not what your mind paints me OUT to be saying. But rather debate what I AM ACTUALLY SAYING, please.

It is you that keeps dancing around. It is obvious that you really believe the world must dance to your tune. It doesn't.

If a mannerism is not sinful ... and you say your have not used the word ... then why bother about the topic at all. You say a man should act like a man and I ask by whose standard?

You have not answered my questions.

Should the Scots give up their kilts?
Should the Greek men give up their traditional dress, the skirts?
Was Jesus wrong to wear a robe?
Should Arab men give up their robes?
 

Luke2427

Active Member
It is you that keeps dancing around.

A five year old could make such a claim. Anybody who can type could say this.

Prove it. It is immature to launch insults in the form of unwarranted claims.

It is obvious that you really believe the world must dance to your tune. It doesn't.

Another unwarranted claim.

If a mannerism is not sinful ... and you say your have not used the word ... then why bother about the topic at all.

Do you think the only things worth talking about are those things that are terribly sinful?????????

Just because it MAY not be sinful, does not mean it is good.

You say a man should act like a man and I ask by whose standard?

I have clarified this ad nauseum.

You have not answered my questions.

That's because they have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS TOPIC. NOTHING.

Should the Scots give up their kilts?

I have not said ONE WORD against the way people dress in this thread.

I COULD NOT, COULD NOT have been clearer. I have said the words "walk, talk and move" LITERALLY dozens of times.

MANNERISMS is the subject of this thread. Dress has NOTHING to do with it.

That's why I did not answer your questions.

You might as well have asked me the price of tea in China. I would not pause to answer that either because it has NOTHING to do with this conversation.

Should the Greek men give up their traditional dress, the skirts?

Amazing.

Was Jesus wrong to wear a robe?

Amazing.

Should Arab men give up their robes?

Amazing.

We are talking about actual physical mannerisms and movements and you want to talk about garments.

Amazing.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Let me give you an example from my own life.

Many years ago we made friends with a family that had just moved to the States form Korea. We invited their daughter to stay with us over a weekend. The parents consented and she spend the weekend with us. Several years later she lived in our home for a year.

One day I asked her, "What was your impression after your first weekend visit with us."

She laughed and replied, "I went home and my parents asked, 'What are they life.' "

I told them, "They seem very nice, but I do not understand whey they are married."

The parents asked, "Why"?

She told her parents, "Because he walked into the kitchen and helped."

She explained that in the Korean culture that a man going into the kitchen and helping was seen as a very effeminate action. Thus such an action could only be viewed as a homosexual action.

Laying aside the interpretation of homosexuality of this action, it was simply something that a man would not do in that culture.

Was the action of going into the kitchen wrong? In their culture yes. In our culture no.

The only universal is that there are no universals.

 

Luke2427

Active Member
Let me give you an example from my own life.

Many years ago we made friends with a family that had just moved to the States form Korea. We invited their daughter to stay with us over a weekend. The parents consented and she spend the weekend with us. Several years later she lived in our home for a year.

One day I asked her, "What was your impression after your first weekend visit with us."

She laughed and replied, "I went home and my parents asked, 'What are they life.' "

I told them, "They seem very nice, but I do not understand whey they are married."

The parents asked, "Why"?

She told her parents, "Because he walked into the kitchen and helped."

She explained that in the Korean culture that a man going into the kitchen and helping was seen as a very effeminate action. Thus such an action could only be viewed as a homosexual action.

Laying aside the interpretation of homosexuality of this action, it was simply something that a man would not do in that culture.

Was the action of going into the kitchen wrong? In their culture yes. In our culture no.

The only universal is that there are no universals.


This has nothing to do with this conversation.

No one is saying that there are NO cultural implications to this subject at all.

What we are saying is that there are SOME THINGS, CERTAIN MANNERISMS exhibited in the way men WALK, TALK AND MOVE that are universally recognized as effeminate.

Talking about someone washing dishes has NOTHING AT ALL to do with mannerisms in the way men WALK, TALK and MOVE.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Luke wrote:
Do you think the only things worth talking about are those things that are terribly sinful?????????

No, but you are making a major issue of this and I do not see it as a major issue. I do see it as an issue that bothers you greatly and one in which you take an indefensible stance, though you continue to dance a lot.

Just because it MAY not be sinful, does not mean it is good.

The word sin means to fall short of the mark ... the mark being the perfection of God. Thus, any action, inaction that does not meet the perfection of God is a sin. In fact, we are probably committing a sin in continuing to discuss this topic as I see no redeeming merit in the topic.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
Luke wrote:

No, but you are making a major issue of this and I do not see it as a major issue. I do see it as an issue that bothers you greatly and one in which you take an indefensible stance, though you continue to dance a lot.

ANOTHER unwarranted claim.

I do not think you know the first thing about debate.

When you claim the kind of insulting claims you make here, you are honor bound to SUPPORT them or not make them at all.

PROVE WHAT YOU CLAIM. To fail to do so is despicable.

Any five year old can make unwarranted claims and insult people. That's neither debate NOR conversation.

It's just childish name calling.

I contend that a thing does not have to be abominable to be unhealthy.

I contend that we can discuss at great length things that are unhealthy- and we SHOULD.

I contend I have defended my stance quite well. Prove otherwise.

I contend that I have not danced on the issue at all and that your perception of any dancing on my part is a deficiency in your comprehension skills.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DiamondLady

New Member
I think I finally get what you are REALLY asking. I think what you're really saying is, "Why do straight men do things that make them seem like homosexuals? Why do they use the affects of gay men?"

It's the only thing, after all these posts, all this back and forthing with you saying basically nothing, that makes sense.

You admit that men (and women) can not change their physical being and the examples you've given are of 1 openly gay man and one comedian who has made a huge success of himself playing over the top gay men.

Harvery Fierstein is who he is, I think he exaggerates a lot because it IS funny. He plays off his voice to create a character. Sacha Baron Cohen ....a lot of people think his movies are beyond funny into the realm of hilarious. Me, I don't get modern humor at all and rarely, if ever, find it remotely funny. The Dick Van Dyke Show is what I'd call funny. Why does Sacha Baron Cohen, a heterosexual male pretend to be an over the top gay man? I think that's a pretty easy question to anwer. He makes MILLIONS of dollars every time he does it and it's made him famous. Is he like that in real life...no. I've seen him on television and he does not act that way at all.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
I think I finally get what you are REALLY asking. I think what you're really saying is, "Why do straight men do things that make them seem like homosexuals? Why do they use the affects of gay men?"

It's the only thing, after all these posts, all this back and forthing with you saying basically nothing, that makes sense.

You admit that men (and women) can not change their physical being and the examples you've given are of 1 openly gay man and one comedian who has made a huge success of himself playing over the top gay men.

Harvery Fierstein is who he is, I think he exaggerates a lot because it IS funny. He plays off his voice to create a character. Sacha Baron Cohen ....a lot of people think his movies are beyond funny into the realm of hilarious. Me, I don't get modern humor at all and rarely, if ever, find it remotely funny. The Dick Van Dyke Show is what I'd call funny. Why does Sacha Baron Cohen, a heterosexual male pretend to be an over the top gay man? I think that's a pretty easy question to anwer. He makes MILLIONS of dollars every time he does it and it's made him famous. Is he like that in real life...no. I've seen him on television and he does not act that way at all.

No, I've not been the least bit ambiguous since the start til now.

I am talking about men who walk, talk and move in effeminate ways like Bruno and Harvey but who are themselves not gay like Harvey is and Sasha Cohen plays.

Is it OK for healthy Christian, heterosexual men to walk, talk and act like Bruno or should Christian men seek to walk, talk and act in a way that is consistent with masculinity and distinct from femininity.

This is not difficult.

The question is EXTREMELY clear.

Don't muddy the water with stuff about people whose physical make-up FORCES them to walk, talk and act a certain way.

I'm talking about healthy people as I have made abundantly clear dozens of times.

If a woman's PHYSICAL MAKE-UP forces her to walk like a man, then she has nothing to do with this conversation. She cant help it. We're talking about people who CAN help it.
 

DiamondLady

New Member
No, I've not been the least bit ambiguous since the start til now.

I am talking about men who walk, talk and move in effeminate ways like Bruno and Harvey but who are themselves not gay like Harvey is and Sasha Cohen plays.

Is it OK for healthy Christian, heterosexual men to walk, talk and act like Bruno or should Christian men seek to walk, talk and act in a way that is consistent with masculinity and distinct from femininity.

This is not difficult.

The question is EXTREMELY clear.

Don't muddy the water with stuff about people whose physical make-up FORCES them to walk, talk and act a certain way.

I'm talking about healthy people as I have made abundantly clear dozens of times.

If a woman's PHYSICAL MAKE-UP forces her to walk like a man, then she has nothing to do with this conversation. She cant help it. We're talking about people who CAN help it.

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!! THis is EXACTLY what I said you were asking. WHY DOES A STRAIGHT MAN ACT LIKE A GAY MAN? You're trying to stir the waters, sir. BTW your initial question was clear as mud, as evidenced by the fact of how we're deep into this thread and nobody has answered your initial question. Why? Because nobody understood it until now! That ought to tell you something, Luke.

I think I explained why they do it. For actors like Cohen...Millions of dollars and fame. For others, it's the laughs they get. Some do it to ridicule others. Some for the attention. Is it right? I'm sure Cohen thinks it's perfectly all right. Do I? I detest the modern humor..I don't think it's funny. But if he wants to act ridiculous I don't think it's any more wrong than the men who act equally ridiculous on this message board spending hour after hour, day after day, week after week, month after month arguing about Cal/Arm, and the other silliness they argue about. Come to think of it, I've wasted a lot of time on this idiocy myself. I think I'm done with it.

P.S.....if you want to address CHRISTIANS acting in this way you need to give examples of Christian comedians who are adapting this personality or real Christians people can see as examples of what you're asking. I sincerely doubt that either Feirstein (who is Jewish) or Cohen are Christians.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

humblethinker

Active Member
P.S.....if you want to address CHRISTIANS acting in this way you need to give examples of Christian comedians who are adapting this personality or real Christians people can see as examples of what you're asking. I sincerely doubt that either Feirstein (who is Jewish) or Cohen are Christians.
Tim Hawkins does this quite often in his comedy. He is, btw, hilarious!
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Why don't you enlighten us?

I take that as you don't...so sure! In Hebrew culture the tents were divided into 2 main sections, one for the men and one for the women. The head of the family (the patriarch) would sit at the opening of the tent watching the women and overseeing the community and their family's daily activities. The men would be in the fields, or doing what men did during that time. The women would stay in the tents doing what women did at that time.

Jacob was a girly man, one of the reasons Isaac's favorite was Esau. I take it he would have been your favorite basd on this thread as well.

Do we gather from Scripture Jacob was sinning by being effeminate? I don't see it.

I also find it funny that many theologians who hold to the machismo view twist Jacob into one who decided to stay in the tent and study the Torah...or gleen wisdom from Isaac. That goes completely against what the Hebrew reader would understand that to mean contextually and historically, not to mention makes no sense in Esau being the favorite son.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Luke, if "walk, talk and move" are your criteria, how do you explain David and Jonathan's dialogue, weeping and mannerisms toward each other?
 

Skandelon

<b>Moderator</b>
She cant help it. We're talking about people who CAN help it.

Why does it matter if they "can help it" or not? That has never mattered for you (and your doctrinal system) in the past? Plus, how can they "help it" if their mannerisms have been casually determined by divine decree? I thought you denied Libertarian freedom and thus the ability of people to do otherwise from what they choose to do?

Please explain how this is different from any other sinful choice of man?
 

Sapper Woody

Well-Known Member
This thread has turned into a perfect example of a way to not debate. The question was clear to me from the beginning. It's been clear this whole time.

The example of the homosexuals given were not to bring the discussion to homosexuality, but to provide a visual so that anyone not understanding could figure out what type of mannerisms Luke was talking about. He was asking, is it ok for a straight man to act like this?

He did not ask if it was sinful. He did not ask if that made them homosexual. He did not ask if they could help it, in fact said that he conceded that if they couldn't help it, it was ok.

CTB, you keep asking for specific examples. He gave them, in the link. That was a perfect example of how a man would act effeminantly, whether he was gay or straight.

Diamondlady, I do not mean to insult your intelligence at all. But it has been clear what Luke has been asking from the first post. I read the first post, and was going to reply. But I typically don't reply to a first post without reading what others have said. My point is, I understood it enough to reply after only reading the OP.

Now, to answer you, Luke. There are certain things which society claims are more effeminant, but are ok. And there are some that aren't. If a guy walked up to me and and had a limp wrist, touched my shoulder, and said with a lisp, "That's so super!" I would immediately be wary of him, and assume he was a homosexual. If he was a straight man (and claimed to be a Christian), I would take him aside and explain to him that his actions told the world that he was a homosexual.

Is this right? Is it ok that the world would immediately judge him? Probably not. But the beholder makes the rules of perception. If the world perceives someone to be gay, even if it's unfair, then that person should change (again, barring any physical reason why they can't.)

That being said, some men act more effimenantly simply because of the way they grew up. They might not have had a male figure to look to, and so picked up on a mother's feminine mannerisms. In this case, we need to take this man "under our wing" and teach him how to be a man. Not to judge him, but so that when the world looks at him, he does not give them any cause to believe that we as Christians condone homosexuality.

Now, there are some things that, taken out of context, seem effeminant but may not be in context. Take myself for an example. When not in my military uniform, I use hairgel and "mess" my hair in a "spikey" manner. I wear a silver necklace and a silver bracelet with a couple small diamond studs in them. I wear italian cut button up shirts, nice jeans, and nice shoes. I enjoy having my fingernails well manicured. I am what some refer to as a "meterosexual", a heterosexual man that likes to take care of himself and how he appears, dresses nice.

Each one of those may seem a little effeminant. But, I have a 38" chest and 34" waist. I walk with a purpose with my shoulders squared back. When someone does something wrong (like drop a cigarette butt on the ground, or cuss in front of my wife and kids) I call them on it. I am not limp wristed, I love sports and being outside. I have stepped into the cage a time or two and competed in MMA matches.

If you were to take one thing such as wearing a bracelet, or having nice nails, it might seem effeminant. But you have to take the whole package together. There's not one man in my unit who would ever accuse me of being a homosexual. If you were to see me on the street, you would not think I was a homosexual. Very good looking and well dressed, maybe; but not a homosexual.:laugh:

So, to answer your question bluntly and simply; yes, it is a problem and we should be aware of it. However, we shouldn't be too quick to judge and should keep the mindset of furthering the cause of Christ, not the mindset of just correcting people to be correcting people.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
I take that as you don't...so sure! In Hebrew culture the tents were divided into 2 main sections, one for the men and one for the women. The head of the family (the patriarch) would sit at the opening of the tent watching the women and overseeing the community and their family's daily activities. The men would be in the fields, or doing what men did during that time. The women would stay in the tents doing what women did at that time.

Jacob was a girly man, one of the reasons Isaac's favorite was Esau. I take it he would have been your favorite basd on this thread as well.

Do we gather from Scripture Jacob was sinning by being effeminate? I don't see it.

I also find it funny that many theologians who hold to the machismo view twist Jacob into one who decided to stay in the tent and study the Torah...or gleen wisdom from Isaac. That goes completely against what the Hebrew reader would understand that to mean contextually and historically, not to mention makes no sense in Esau being the favorite son.

That has absolutely nothing to do with him walking, talking and moving like homosexuals or women.

Nothing.

A man being an indoors person and a momma's boy does not make him effeminate. That has nothing to do with this conversation.

And yes, I did know the things which you sighted. I don't know of anybody who did NOT know that Jacob dwelled in the tents with his mother rather than doing what most of the other men did. I just thought you knew something that I did not which had anything at all to do with this conversation.

You did not.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
Luke, if "walk, talk and move" are your criteria, how do you explain David and Jonathan's dialogue, weeping and mannerisms toward each other?

I don't think they're even remotely related to a man walking, talking and moving like Bruno.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
This thread has turned into a perfect example of a way to not debate. The question was clear to me from the beginning. It's been clear this whole time.

The example of the homosexuals given were not to bring the discussion to homosexuality, but to provide a visual so that anyone not understanding could figure out what type of mannerisms Luke was talking about. He was asking, is it ok for a straight man to act like this?

He did not ask if it was sinful. He did not ask if that made them homosexual. He did not ask if they could help it, in fact said that he conceded that if they couldn't help it, it was ok.

CTB, you keep asking for specific examples. He gave them, in the link. That was a perfect example of how a man would act effeminantly, whether he was gay or straight.

Diamondlady, I do not mean to insult your intelligence at all. But it has been clear what Luke has been asking from the first post. I read the first post, and was going to reply. But I typically don't reply to a first post without reading what others have said. My point is, I understood it enough to reply after only reading the OP.

Thanks.

I think that I have been clear and any misunderstanding is the fault of the one's who bear the misunderstanding.

You are not the first to point this out to them.

And I agree 100% with the rest of your post that I did not include in the quote above.
 
This thread has turned into a perfect example of a way to not debate. The question was clear to me from the beginning. It's been clear this whole time.

The example of the homosexuals given were not to bring the discussion to homosexuality, but to provide a visual so that anyone not understanding could figure out what type of mannerisms Luke was talking about. He was asking, is it ok for a straight man to act like this?

He did not ask if it was sinful. He did not ask if that made them homosexual. He did not ask if they could help it, in fact said that he conceded that if they couldn't help it, it was ok.

CTB, you keep asking for specific examples. He gave them, in the link. That was a perfect example of how a man would act effeminantly, whether he was gay or straight.

Diamondlady, I do not mean to insult your intelligence at all. But it has been clear what Luke has been asking from the first post. I read the first post, and was going to reply. But I typically don't reply to a first post without reading what others have said. My point is, I understood it enough to reply after only reading the OP.

Now, to answer you, Luke. There are certain things which society claims are more effeminant, but are ok. And there are some that aren't. If a guy walked up to me and and had a limp wrist, touched my shoulder, and said with a lisp, "That's so super!" I would immediately be wary of him, and assume he was a homosexual. If he was a straight man (and claimed to be a Christian), I would take him aside and explain to him that his actions told the world that he was a homosexual.

Is this right? Is it ok that the world would immediately judge him? Probably not. But the beholder makes the rules of perception. If the world perceives someone to be gay, even if it's unfair, then that person should change (again, barring any physical reason why they can't.)

That being said, some men act more effimenantly simply because of the way they grew up. They might not have had a male figure to look to, and so picked up on a mother's feminine mannerisms. In this case, we need to take this man "under our wing" and teach him how to be a man. Not to judge him, but so that when the world looks at him, he does not give them any cause to believe that we as Christians condone homosexuality.

Now, there are some things that, taken out of context, seem effeminant but may not be in context. Take myself for an example. When not in my military uniform, I use hairgel and "mess" my hair in a "spikey" manner. I wear a silver necklace and a silver bracelet with a couple small diamond studs in them. I wear italian cut button up shirts, nice jeans, and nice shoes. I enjoy having my fingernails well manicured. I am what some refer to as a "meterosexual", a heterosexual man that likes to take care of himself and how he appears, dresses nice.

Each one of those may seem a little effeminant. But, I have a 38" chest and 34" waist. I walk with a purpose with my shoulders squared back. When someone does something wrong (like drop a cigarette butt on the ground, or cuss in front of my wife and kids) I call them on it. I am not limp wristed, I love sports and being outside. I have stepped into the cage a time or two and competed in MMA matches.

If you were to take one thing such as wearing a bracelet, or having nice nails, it might seem effeminant. But you have to take the whole package together. There's not one man in my unit who would ever accuse me of being a homosexual. If you were to see me on the street, you would not think I was a homosexual. Very good looking and well dressed, maybe; but not a homosexual.:laugh:

So, to answer your question bluntly and simply; yes, it is a problem and we should be aware of it. However, we shouldn't be too quick to judge and should keep the mindset of furthering the cause of Christ, not the mindset of just correcting people to be correcting people.


Hands down, the best post in this thread!! Kudos!! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top