Women aren’t more emotional and men more logical
That’s the rhetoric that we often hear, but men are just as emotional as women–they just don’t necessarily process those emotions as well.
Chapters 7 and 8 in our new book The Marriage You Want are all about how to connect emotionally and understand our emotions, and they’re our favourite part of the book!
Today we want to show you, through some terrible clips from megachurch pastors, the problem where people assume that men aren’t emotional. We’ll show the route to both of you growing emotionally with each other. And then we’ll share a quick tip at the end on how to build your emotional connection!
John Gottman has found that far fewer men than women are emotionally intelligent, and he believes the next big evolution in humanity is going to be men becoming more emotionally healthy.
But today we’re going to listen to evangelical pastors who believe the opposite: Who think it’s men’s job to control their wives’ emotions.
Or, as always, you can watch on YouTube:
Let’s stop the rhetoric that emotions are feminine
You’ll hear Josh Howerton saying husbands need to “lead” their wife’s emotions (which basically means whenever she’s upset, telling her she’s not being rational). You’ll hear Josh McPherson saying that women’s basic sin is trying to take over from her husband when she thinks he’s doing something wrong with the relationship.
But you’ll also hear John Gottman explaining that for marriage to work well, men actually have to listen to their wives about this stuff, because women in general are better at this.
So the evidence-based approach is to teach men to listen to their wives; and evangelical megapastors are up there yelling at women to shut up and telling men to shut their wives down.
Who thinks this is going to end well?
Plus we share a clip from Emerson Eggerichs where he clearly shows that men are way too emotionally dysregulated (how he fails to understand emotional dysregulation) and Matt Walsh complaining about men’s suicide rates–without realizing the root is the same thing. Patriarchy tells men not to feel, express, or admit their emotions, and then, when men have negative outcomes because of that, they still blame women.
How about we all just get more emotionally healthy–like Gottman talks about?
What if Marriage Didn't Have to Be Women's Main Ministry?
with thanks to Brazos press for sponsoring this ad!
Beth Allison Barr is out with another meticulously researched book that will turn the evangelical world on its head!
What if everything you've been taught about how women were never meant to hold church office is wrong?
And what if your grandmothers even had more freedom in evangelical churches than women do today?
Let's look at how marriage replaced ordination as a woman's path to ministry--and how we can find our voices again!
Links You Need
WITH THANKS TO OUR SPONSOR:
Beth Allison Barr’s insightful and important new book Becoming the Pastor’s Wife: How Marriage Replaced Ordination as a Woman’s Path to Ministry. Learn how women got pushed out of ministry positions in favour of marriage, and what we can do about it.
TO SUPPORT US:
- Join our Patreon for as little as $5 a month to support our work
- For tax deductible donations in the U.S., support Good Fruit Faith Initiative through the Bosko Foundation
- And check out our Merch, or any of our courses!
- Join our email list!
LINKS TO THINGS MENTIONED:
- Our new book The Marriage You Want
- Open letter to Focus on the Family
- Our one-sheet download on the problems with Love & Respect
- Emerson Eggerichs’ sermon dissection and the podcast that goes with it
- Carolyn Custis James’ Maelstrom
- Josh Howerton clip
- Matt Walsh post
- Our podcast on emotions with Becky Castle Miller
What do you think of the clips we played? How can we have more emotional conversations? Let’s talk in the comments!
Transcript
Coming soon!
You know what this reminds me of?
It reminds me of a meme.
He didn’t cry at the end of Titanic. Do men not have feelings?
Meanwhile the Man.
“I can not self terminate”
Abd the man is emotionally devastated.
See I can respect the idea of being in control of your emotions.
What I do not respect is when people like Andrew Tate or Dan Bilzarian or those kinds of folks tell men that they need to be these callous abusive jerks because they say that men need confidence and that women don’t respect men who can’t say what they want.
And they do so while also abusing the works of Marcus Aurelius.
Also about Walsh in particular. Walsh is just actually wrong about hobbies. He regularly says that men that like videogames or anime or wargaming are childish. The truth is though that these are great ways to connect with people and to engage with the world.
It’s funny because I can use examples from such things to prove my point.
Ask a bunch of men how they feel about characters like Samwise Gamgee or Nicholas Wolfwood or about how when characters like Conquest go on about how lonely he is or why so many people get emotionally tied up at the “I cannot self terminate scene” It is because we aren’t unfeeling.
It says a lot to me at least that one of the characters who helps people understand this is a cybernetic killing machine. The whole story there is about how influential human relationships can be.
Another character I know this blog will appreciate is Spock. Vulcan aren’t actually without emotion. This is proven by the fact that Romulans genetically are Vulcans. The issue is cultural. Vulcan culture emphasizes logic because it helped them avoid self destruction. We see Spock get emotional. We even see his father Sarek get emotional. When Sarek thought his son was dead he is reminding himself of all the accomplishment Spock made because he’s trying to show himself that his son did learn from him. He’d rather focus on what Spock accomplished and grieve by remembering what good has been lost than just breaking down.
Ah, Wolfwood mentioned! I so love how Trigun deals with male feelings- Vash is very well-written with regards to emotion as well.
Trigun is Based.
Kudos for mentioning Spock! Heck, we could also mention the other two members of the iconic TOS trio: Captain Kirk and Dr. McCoy. McCoy was probably the most emotional of the three, hence his constant verbal sparring with Spock, but Kirk was the balance of the trio – the mix of logic and emotion. And I’d even argue that he was an emotionally healthy man – Kirk wept for Spock when he died in “The Wrath of Khan” and rejoiced at the end of “The Search for Spock” when his friend was resurrected. He wasn’t afraid to hug his friends or express his feelings, which (IMO) still makes him one of the best Star Trek men.
Thank you for this podcast! Absolutely appreciate the correction of these horrible teachings!
Matt Walsh’s quote seems a bit dramatic – “the husband carries the crushing burden of making sure the family has food, shelter, and security. If he fails, everyone he loves loses everything. This pressure weighs on him constantly.”
While I’m sure that in SOME cases men do in fact carry the burden of providing for their family in the way that Matt describes I just don’t think that this burden is realistic for most of the middle class western men who I assume are the primary consumers of Mr. Walsh’s materials.
In my scenario, my husband works and I stay at home…so he is the sole bread winner…so he carries this burden right!?! I don’t think so… Prior to having children I worked for 10+ years as a chemical engineer and I’m a generally frugal person. As such, I provided quite a large “nest egg” that has given us a healthy saving as well as paid for my husbands MBA. My husband’s current job pays him much more than any of us need. If he should loose his job he is well set up to find a new one and we have plenty in our retirement account to live on until then…also I’m perfectly capable of going back to work. So, if it so happens that my husband feels this heavy weight of providing for his family on his shoulders it is not based in facts, but just perception…baring a great depression type scenario it is extremely unlikely that our family will be in financial ruin regardless of what happens with work, stock markets, etc.
To be clear, work outside of the home involves certain stresses (as does work inside the home) and we should be supportive of each other when stressors arise, but generally speaking a middle class man’s ambition to do well at his job is likely driven more by a personal drive for success than it is a deep obligation to his family.
Furthermore, this quote makes it sound like if the man can’t physically provide for his family then the family will fall apart. But, what about a man providing emotionally and spiritually for his family…if husband and dad is absent emotionally and spiritually won’t that also (or even more so) cause his family to fall apart?
To supplement your thoughts: many families need 2 incomes to get by or live the lifestyles they want. In circles where having a SAHM is the ideal scenario, these speakers may be adding a burden on to these men who feel they must do it without the help of a second income and who then place this unrealsitic expectation upon themselves.
By painting husbands’ burden as such, the role of man is inflated; the role and burden on women is decreased and invalidated.
Agreed. Thank you for articulating that dynamic. I think that Sheila and Keith addressed this unrealistic expectation on men (when perhaps it makes more sense for both spouses to work) and the need for spouses to work together in the podcast as well.
I just wanted to point out that in certain circles (many of the circles that I swim in), the men are in a place of financial privilege and money really isn’t a concern (or if it is it’s probably coming more from a place of greed than need). In these instances this “physical provider” burden on men simply isn’t there.
Seems worth acknowledging that ALL men do not carry this heavy burden even if they are the sole “bread winners” as many western men are living in a financially privileged situation. But, the emotional burden actually is always there regardless of the families financial status.
👍
I had some interruptions while listening so I must have missed them making the point about 2 incomes.
I also liked your point, “…if husband and dad is absent emotionally and spiritually won’t that also (or even more so) cause his family to fall apart?” Walsh, et al seem to often emphasize (and exaggerate) the wrong things.
I want to point out a gap I spotted in this podcast. I realize that you have time constraints, so not everything can be covered.
But I wanted to point out that there ARE times when it makes sense to check our emotions with logic and facts. If I catch myself having emotions that are unwarranted by circumstances, it’s a signal to look deeper at what’s causing that.
So it’s useful to think “I am safe, there are no threats here. I am having a good day doing something I enjoy with someone I love. So why am I suddenly angry, terrified, sad, or overwhelmed?”
The answer could be physical illness, or even a realization that I’m simply exhausted and need to rest or eat. Or hormones: I’ve been experiencing the physical manifestations of the fight/flight response lately, and suddenly angry or terrified. It wasn’t until I noticed a few physical changes that I realized I’m 47 and this is probably just peri, so I made a doctor appointment to have my hormones checked.
But I do try hard to check those emotions and not bring them into my relationship. Realizing that I’m irrationally angry allows me to tell my husband, “you know what? I am furious. I want to throw things. This has nothing to do with you. I’m going to go lift weights. I’ll be back when the adrenaline fades.” Which, in turn, helps him know where we stand, and prevents conflict.
ALSO, it’s important to remove that depression can be prodromal for other illnesses. I suffered from severe depression for years before being diagnosed with MS. And something 50% of MS patients have depression – BEFORE diagnosis, so it’s not a reaction to having a disease.
All that to say, emotions aren’t always cognitive so it’s worth a mention to check for root cause when they seem out of whack. And not to make major life decisions when that’s happening.
I agree that sometimes our emotions are out of kilter with reality – but the point of this podcast is the assumption made by far too many ‘Christian’ authors that it is only women who experience this and that ALL their emotions are out of control and not based on reality.
You’re probably right about your feelings being due to peri – I’m coming out of that stage now, but for a few years, I would suddenly feel an overwhelming flood of emotion, usually sorrow but sometimes fear or anger, which wasn’t based on any real experience. But guess what – I didn’t need my husband to ‘lead’ me through that (just as well, because I was single for a large part of the time I was going through peri!). I’m quite able to recognise the difference between emotions that have their basis in fact and those which are due to hormonal blips without external ‘help’ (especially ‘help’ from someone who is going to assume that ALL my emotions are illogical!)
Both men and women can experience emotions which are not based on circumstances – it’s not something that is exclusive to women. And being able to provide a reality check is not exclusive to men either – when my husband is expressing concern about his depression in winter, I’m the one who reminds him that he always suffers with it at that time of year and that it helps if he gets as much daylight as possible!
Ironically, there is far less pressure on men when women have useful degrees and some work experience, regardless of whether or not she currently works.
Yet I don’t see the Matt Walsh types telling women to please study chemical engineering or learn to weld.
Good point – maybe if women are encouraged to contribute to their families and society with their God given gifts, rather than encouraged to make sure that they are in a submissive role to all men (which is nearly impossible in certain careers), it would be better for everyone.
I do think a lot of men feel this sort of pressure, whether it’s based in reality or not, because many of us in conservative circle were brought up with the idea that if a husband doesn’t provide for his family as the sole breadwinner he is a failure as a man and a husband/father. They feel that if a wife has to work they must be lazy or incompetent. When men are taught that the primary way they care for their family is as the sole breadwinner, if they do not do that, then they feel that they are not loving their families, and good men do love their wives and children and want to take care of them. Add to this the fact that many men are in jobs they dislike, and you have the extra layer of men not wanting to make their wives suffer the same fate. This really is a harmful teaching for men, but it’s not any easy one to get away from when it’s been so engrained in us.
Nothing so engrained is easy to get away from, but it is well worth doing the work it takes to get away! Encourage your wife to work if she wants to! Allow yourself to allow her to help you! Do whatever work you need to do to heal from such toxic teachings, find a job that you love, and don’t assume that your wife can’t do the same if she doesn’t like the first job she finds. (And also pick up on the housework when she finds that job. She doesn’t need to work two jobs!)
I think this is so true. I think a lot of men are putting so much pressure/shame on themselves needlessly, and it’s really sad.
Yes – absolutely!
Appreciate your feedback 🙂
Above response was a reply to Nessie – guess I put my reply in the comments rather than hitting the reply button.
Matt Walsh is always a such a pompous ass. He fails to realize that the reason that men supposedly feel such a crushing burden is that they refuse to allow the women in their lives to do anything other than wash their socks and make more babies who need support. He fails to understand that it is his beloved patriarchy that creates those problems. He fails on so many levels.
Oh, the rich and unsurpassable irony of complementarian teachers getting their doctrinal view of Genesis 3:16 from Susan Foh — A WOMAN!
There is only one way that this fact can be interpreted: that complementarian men don’t practise what they preach. In other words, these guys have no integrity. Tell me again why I should listen to them?
I’ve been on my soapbox among my friend group for a while now about how men are *just* as emotional as women but lack the self awareness to realize it. 99% of all wars, murders, and domestic violence are the result of a man losing control of his emotions! To me, THAT is pathetic weakness. Women are the ones responsible for managing everyone’s emotions around us (our own, husbands’, and children’s) to keep the peace and keep ourselves safe. Then they have the gall to call *us* the weak ones. The hypocrisy and smugness of a man saying he’s the logical one and she’s the emotional one is mind blowing. What’s more logical: to recognize our emotions, process them, discuss them with friends, and live a longer life as a result? or bottle them up and let them get the best of you, all while delusionally calling yourself a manly man in warrior mode?
So these guys ignore all the scientific evidence contradicting their deeply held belief that women are more emotional and less logical than men, because their belief just feels like it is right…
No, I see no contradiction between their behaviour and their claim that men are more logical and less emotional…
This makes me think of the way Jesus and the disciples are portrayed in “The Chosen.” These are men who clearly love each other and their families and aren’t afraid to show emotion. Jesus Himself is shown throughout the series as having fun with the guys, weeping at the death of Lazarus, hugging his disciples, and – yes! – treating the women around him with the utmost respect. There’s a scene in the new season where Jesus is having dinner with the women before he has the Last Supper with the disciples, and he thanks each one of them for what they have done for him. It’s just beautiful to see.